This forum example (link here) is one I'm using not to poke any fun at the people involved or say anybody is incompetent, but simply because it illustrates such a profound point. I stumbled upon it whilst Googling to find out the same thing: how to play movies in Microsoft's WMV format on Linux. It worked, by the way.
This is a classic case of newbie frustration. To quote:
arggghhh I swear as much as I like ubuntu/linux, I am sick of dealing with all the issues. No one has anything for a beginner. I dont’ even know how to create a new folder above my home directory, and I’m already on my 50th google just to watch one stupid wmv video.
Also is the Mplayer kaffiene? or do I download Mplayer from somewhere else? I’m trying to watch a video for my homework here.
If linux wants to make it mainstream, the support has got to get better people. Put in all the steps. Sorry for venting, but it’s tough being a “newbie.”
My point is going to be (a) the typical reaction of Linux apologists to this is WRONG, and (b) my own unconventional means of addressing this issue.
The Linux apologists are the ones pushing to throw away everything that makes Linux Linux in the feverish hopes that Linux will replace Microsoft and get the world market. Doubtless, I could circulate this to ten random technology blogs and in the morning there will be ten new "Linux will never make it on the desktop" editorials. The suggestions will run the gamut from how Linux "elitists" drive newbies away, through to suggestions that we throw away the folder hierarchy system, and there will be plenty of bashing of Linux's user interface along the way. You could set your watch to it.
Here's how I would react to a newbie who said this to me: I would first ask, "What are you doing using a computer?" Seriously, without sarcasm. If all you're doing is watching media files, there's TiVo, WebTV, cell phones, and gaming consoles both monolithic and portable. I don't know where this idea that computers should be movie players came from; it is the equivalent of using an atom smasher to peel your banana. Computers want to compile code or at the very least edit video, not be turned into TV sets.
But, assuming that the user has other purposes which justify the expense and trouble of owning a computer, my next question would be "How is this Linux's fault?" Microsoft goes to great pains to rig the market against Linux. Every time we're able to access a Microsoft document, format, or codec, it has been a game of guessing and hacking, most likely with Microsoft lawyers biting our hind ends at every single step. When we use our own (and the public's) non-proprietary formats, we never have this problem. Even to run on the hardware is sometimes a struggle, since hardware manufacturers frequently deny Linux programmers the specs on their equipment, and have even sued to cease and desist when we cracked their hardware to run Linux on it even after we've paid our money for that hardware.
Next I would ask, "How did you ever handle Windows?" Again, no sarcasm, I'm seriously wondering. See, if a simple thing like a folder has you stumped, and folders have been a computer metaphor for file organization since at the very least the mid-1980's, and even Windows has folders galore, then how have you even gotten this far? To say nothing of accessing Windows' "hidden" and "archive" files and folders. Let's not even pretend that this is a Linux issue. You are doing the equivalent of standing outside the new car you've just bought and asking "How do I get in?" And the Linux apologists are doing the equivalent of saying "Right, we'll remove the doors from all cars from now on, so it's not so confusing for the new user!"
By now, by way of doing all that I honestly can to sincerely help a new user, I've established myself as the World's Most Evil Person by the standards of the Linux apologists. I'm now going to seal my fate as the Person Most Likely To Be Lynched By An Angry Mob Waving Pitchforks And Torches. I'm going to tell the new user to RTFM (Read The [Fine/Fun/F***ing] Manual). Not just man pages or info files or the Linux documentation project: no, the user should step AWAY from the computer, keep moving away until they reach a bookstore, and then go in, climb the nearest shelf until they have the attention of the staff, and then scream, "Where can I buy a Linux manual!?!?!"
The user indicates that they're on their 50th Google. Well, even a million Googles wouldn't answer one chapter's worth of questions to be found in such fine works as "Linux for Dummies", "A Practical Guide to Linux", "Beginning Ubuntu Linux: From Novice to Professional", and hundreds more. Go to Amazon.com and search for "Linux". Any book with "Linux" on the cover plus any one of "non-geek", "dummy", "idiot", "beginner", "basic", or "easy" will get you miles farther than all the Googles and forum posts and chat conversations in the world.
Don't tell me that newbies can't read manuals. The average beginner Linux manuscript might run 100,000 words tops. In a lifetime of reading chat room replies, message board posts, forum tutorials, and scanning Google search hits, you might read several million words and not know as much as you could from just one single book. Books are how I got where I am. Books are how many geeks got to be geeks.
Public libraries also have a stock of accumulated computer books, and quite a lot of them are about Linux as well. In fact, that's how I tried my first Linux: I found a copy of the Red Hat bible (version 5.0? if memory serves) with disks in the back, checked it out, and went home and installed it... by myself, following the directions in the book, with no further help. Best expenditure of my tax dollars I ever saw.
Finally, for the people who say that it's the interface's fault: go away. Seriously, if you can read and comprehend this far and still say that an easier interface is the answer, then just leave technology and never come back. At least the newbie has potential to be saved; but an information architect is not worth the waste of electrons to flame them. Computers are difficult because they are powerful. We have enough trouble without the desktop Fung-Shui consultants obfuscating the issue. Go complain about the interface to advanced calculus or organic chemistry for a change. Computers are subject to the same laws of physics as the rest of the universe. Rethinking the interface isn't the key to newbie adoption any more than finding the right pattern of diamonds and magnets is the key to turning lead into gold. But it took humans centuries to quit trying the latter, and that will probably be true for the former.
What are my motives in saying this? Am I a stingy Scrooge who is keeping Linux to myself? Am I an elitist egghead who disdains anybody who isn't as smart about Linux as I am? No, I'm actually helping the newbie. As opposed to the Linux apologists who say it's all Linux's fault, it's Linux expert's fault, blah blah blah. The key cliche here is "killing with kindness". We can keep trying to baby new users because we're just so amazed that anybody would want to use our sophisticated system, or we can quit bullshitting around and actually, really, truly help them adopt Linux. But go ahead for a while longer and try it the New Age Way and type in each step for the hundredth time "This is the mouse. Move it until the pointer on screen is where you want to be. Now click..." for everybody who asks a question. Eventually, the new users' patience is exhausted, and they go back to Windows as one more disgruntled user harping about how Linux will never make it on the desktop. But show me one case where somebody actually LEARNED Linux, and then quit using it.
And that's how it sounds from somebody who knows what they're talking about for a change.
UPDATE: Thank you all for the fascinating response. I see we have many ways to view this issue.
For clarity's sake, I do not regard anybody as an idiot, regardless of how well (or not so much) they know computers. In the case of Windows users migrating to Linux, however, I have had the idea that Microsoft imposes a prisoner mentality. In short, the answer to our problems adapting people and technology to each other may require some deep study into human nature as well as computer science.
UPDATE2: Ho hum. I've nattered about this before elsewhere, but this looks like another good place to post a link to the new "Windows Power Shell", touted as "easy to adopt, learn, and use", whose documentation is to be had here.
It's related to its Longhorn/Monad line. For servers, or, in other words, what half of the Linux distros do out-of-the-box for free.
I had a dance through the docs, and sure enough, there's command lines and option switches and a text prompt just like Unix has had since forever. It has some C# syntax, it's commands are extensible (similar to Linux piping and redirecting, I gather?), and it bluntly declares that Unix commands are usable in it as well. Here, let me give you a sample paragraph from the docs:
Commands that take parameters have irregular parameter specifications. You cannot use the net start command to start a service on a remote computer. The sc command will start a service on a remote computer, but to specify the remote computer, you must prefix its name with a double backslash. For example, to start the spooler service on a remote computer named DC01, you would type sc \\DC01 start spooler. To list tasks running on DC01, you need to use the /S (for "system") parameter and supply the name DC01 without backslashes, like this: tasklist /S DC01.
And, by golly, there's even books for sale at Amazon about it, too!
Now, then, for those of you flaming me for being elitist, care to explain to me again how when Linux does it, it's evil but when Microsoft does it, it's "easy to adopt, learn, and use"... and worth money as a shrink-wrapped product?
"User-friendly" my stank, webbed foot!
56 feedbacks
Comments:
Comment from:
Victor B. Gonzalez [Visitor]
I hated the way Linux worked Vs Windows a little more than a year ago. I hated the cli. I was disoriented by how things worked all together. Truth is, I'll quote ya "show me one case where somebody actually LEARNED Linux, and then quit using it" I'd have to agree on (at least when it comes to myself). I stuck with it because at the time I really despised XP licensing and activation, and a whole bunch of other things... Within a couple months rather than trying to turn Linux into XP, I learned how Linux worked and today, I wouldn't trade it in for the world. Great read!
Comment from:
Brian [Visitor]
I agree completely with everything in your article. I find that the new users tend to be lazy in terms of learning. But remember that they are coming from windows, which by default is for idiots.
Make them read a book. One book!
Make them read a book. One book!
Comment from:
TreGe [Visitor]
· http://blog.trege-soft.com
Now this is a bit of a turn around. Ususally I spend my days stubling across users complaining about the elitist attitude present in most linux guru's. Very rarely do I run across apologies from the linux community about how "hard" linux is to use. And usually, when I do, it is followed by an equally juvinile "flame".
Don't get me wrong, I am a big supporter of a standardized set of configuration utilities and "wizzards" to make linux more accessable to (so-called) "noobs", but I also believe that vim and emacs should be considered prerequisite in these utilities.
Also, be a little sympathetic of these people. There is no reason that these people shouldn't get a little help when starting out in linux. Don't forget that everyone started from nothing at one point.
I would also suggest that firefox add "effective googleing" to the default start page. I can find anything in 1-2 google searches. In fact, early on in middle school I was taught a basic set of instructions to find what I want on google.
PS. I have a linux PVR and am VERY thankful that not everyone agrees with your "computers can't be for just media" point. Your average computer can do much better than TiVo at capturing, encoding, and streaming video(especially if you store it on a centralized server elsewhere in the house).
Don't get me wrong, I am a big supporter of a standardized set of configuration utilities and "wizzards" to make linux more accessable to (so-called) "noobs", but I also believe that vim and emacs should be considered prerequisite in these utilities.
Also, be a little sympathetic of these people. There is no reason that these people shouldn't get a little help when starting out in linux. Don't forget that everyone started from nothing at one point.
I would also suggest that firefox add "effective googleing" to the default start page. I can find anything in 1-2 google searches. In fact, early on in middle school I was taught a basic set of instructions to find what I want on google.
PS. I have a linux PVR and am VERY thankful that not everyone agrees with your "computers can't be for just media" point. Your average computer can do much better than TiVo at capturing, encoding, and streaming video(especially if you store it on a centralized server elsewhere in the house).
Comment from:
I disagree [Visitor]
I disagree.
Learned Linux (with *books*) used it for two years, but after much frustration, it still couldn't do what I needed to do... dropped it. As simple as that.
I needed a good OCR, a good voice recognition software, Photoshop, 100% MS office compatibility (no, OO.org is not 100% compatible, and I can prove it), a stable wireless connection 100% of the time, power management that works, an REAL outlook replacement, etc. etc. etc. None of that exists right now. These are apps, yes, but an OS is nothing wothout apps. Sorry. Been there, done that.
If that's your attitude towards new Linux users, well, have a fun ride all by yourself.
It's not exactly people like you who's done the most for Linux. But all the ones who really try to make it accessible. Interesting to see which distributions are at the top of distrowatch : Ubuntu, OpenSuse, Mandriva, etc. : all the easier to use Linux distros.
Learned Linux (with *books*) used it for two years, but after much frustration, it still couldn't do what I needed to do... dropped it. As simple as that.
I needed a good OCR, a good voice recognition software, Photoshop, 100% MS office compatibility (no, OO.org is not 100% compatible, and I can prove it), a stable wireless connection 100% of the time, power management that works, an REAL outlook replacement, etc. etc. etc. None of that exists right now. These are apps, yes, but an OS is nothing wothout apps. Sorry. Been there, done that.
If that's your attitude towards new Linux users, well, have a fun ride all by yourself.
It's not exactly people like you who's done the most for Linux. But all the ones who really try to make it accessible. Interesting to see which distributions are at the top of distrowatch : Ubuntu, OpenSuse, Mandriva, etc. : all the easier to use Linux distros.
Comment from:
O [Visitor]
· http://bsdadvocacy@irishnation.com
With your elitist attitude to newbies, I suggest you convert to BSD. More of your kind there.
Comment from:
Nick [Visitor]
When and where was Linux supposed to substitute Microsoft Windows in the desktop? It seems to me silly. If it happens, well good. If not, good anyway. Linux was not designed so that it would take over the desktop market. The only reason people really start using it is simply because it's free, as in beer.
I know I may sound controversial, but here it goes. For lots of people getting a Mac would be a much easier choice, in case they would like to move away from Windows. Moving to Linux is more a philosophical process.
And yes I use linux as my primary OS. The difference is that I don't go around trying to convert people to it unless there is a genuine interest in learning a new technology. For people that wants to upgrade to anything new because it's cool and free I usually say: well get a Mac.
I know I may sound controversial, but here it goes. For lots of people getting a Mac would be a much easier choice, in case they would like to move away from Windows. Moving to Linux is more a philosophical process.
And yes I use linux as my primary OS. The difference is that I don't go around trying to convert people to it unless there is a genuine interest in learning a new technology. For people that wants to upgrade to anything new because it's cool and free I usually say: well get a Mac.
Comment from:
"newbie" [Visitor]
Shouldn't the question really be ,eerr what do you know about pc's in general ,cause frankly wether you use windows or linux you should know what something like a partition is ,in other words regardless theOS one should know the basics of computing and yes someone who comes from windows generally lacks this knowledge,but then again speaking about cars ;how much people drive a car without knowing what a voltage regulator does or why the valves open close at a given moment and last but not least :how many of your linux gurus would know a diode from a capacitor even if I showed you? Maybe another ITbubbleburst is needed ,afterall it's the newbie who's paying ,right?
Comment from:
lmf [Visitor]
RTFM killed Linux adoption in the late 90's.
It's a childish and idiotic answer from someone too stupid to tie his own shoes. If you don't want to answer the question, then don't. Otherwise STFU (you figure out what it means.)
It's a childish and idiotic answer from someone too stupid to tie his own shoes. If you don't want to answer the question, then don't. Otherwise STFU (you figure out what it means.)
Comment from:
alrac [Visitor]
Thanks ranty pete! I agree all the way. Something that Windows refugees always forget is how many years they have invested in using Windows. They didn't wake up one morning with leet Windows skills. No, they learned the hard way, like most folks- they're always "too busy" to read books or search online, just pointy-clicky randomly until something sort of works, or pester co-workers who barely know more than they do.
Windows is not easy- what a myth, what a joke to even think so.
Comment from:
GW [Visitor]
A new guy is thinking you have some points, but a bit harsh even with the disclaimers.
So why would somebody have trouble making a new folder?
I'll try clicking on "Places" and "Home Folder" (Ubuntu 6.06) cause that's how I open a File Browser, I just don't know any better.
OK, I know I can right click and make a folder here, but the original writer wanted to create a folder above Home.
So I move up to File System where I can see all the folders, right click and there is New Folder "greyed out" so I can't use it. Maybe this guy has a point.
Open a terminal change to root directory and try to create a folder.
What is the command for making a directory? md ? no. mkd ? no. Allright google Linux Commands and check there.
Oh yeah, mkdir, I was close.
mkdir aa
permission denied
So Linux is protecting me from myself, I have to be root.
sudo mkdir aa
that worked, and I bet I have to be root to remove it! (refer back to command list)
sudo rmdir aa
and it's gone!
No wonder I'm the only one I know using Linux.
So why would somebody have trouble making a new folder?
I'll try clicking on "Places" and "Home Folder" (Ubuntu 6.06) cause that's how I open a File Browser, I just don't know any better.
OK, I know I can right click and make a folder here, but the original writer wanted to create a folder above Home.
So I move up to File System where I can see all the folders, right click and there is New Folder "greyed out" so I can't use it. Maybe this guy has a point.
Open a terminal change to root directory and try to create a folder.
What is the command for making a directory? md ? no. mkd ? no. Allright google Linux Commands and check there.
Oh yeah, mkdir, I was close.
mkdir aa
permission denied
So Linux is protecting me from myself, I have to be root.
sudo mkdir aa
that worked, and I bet I have to be root to remove it! (refer back to command list)
sudo rmdir aa
and it's gone!
No wonder I'm the only one I know using Linux.
Comment from:
Barry T. [Visitor]
· http://chipper.rt@starband.net
The bottom line is, most folks go to Wally World and buy a system that has all the software already install and has all the bells and whistles and everything is setup and working perfectly right out of the box. (At least its supposed to be). They start it up, click on an icon and a movie plays, they can send an email, they can play a game, mp3 or whatever with not too much effort or knowledge of computers. This is great if that is all you want to do. If you really want to learn about a Windows or a Linux system start by building one of each from the ground up by putting together the systems and installing all of the software. By the time that you have accomplished that you won't be a newbie any more and you will realize the advantages of putting out a little effort. Both os's have their +'s and -'s. Windows is easier to use (most people think) but Linux is free and has the stability that Windows has never had. I have a WinXP sytem that I use probably 10% of the time and an Ubuntu 6.10 system that I use the other 90%. My first system was an IBM XT with 640kb of memory, 10meg hard drive, 360kb floppy and Windows 3.0 and believe it or not, I think that it was more stable than the XP system that I have now. I'm expressing my opinion just like everyone else here and yes, I know what opinions are like. Yep, know a lot about cars too, rebuilt a few motors in my life. I learned a lot about diodes and capacitors, triacs, etc from repairing Tv's. Last but not least, if you are willing to put in the effort and time to learn Linux, its STFU (Still Time For U).
Comment from:
marvinudy [Visitor]
I tried Linux in the early Red Hat days and was defeated. After retiring from work, I tried again with modest success. Quickly accepted that Linux was not MS-Windows and invested time to adapt myself to running Linux. Started with early Mandrake(??) and moved on. Quickly figured out Linux does not 'break' as easily as Windows XXX. Purchased "Running Linux" by O'reilly and used it! I feel most Linux "how-to" books I tried moved to rapidly from 'baby steps' to 'novice' level.
Accustomed to the cli in DOS/Windows, switching to Linux was a matter of absorbing a few commands vi the 80/20 rule. Now I'm a certified 'distro-junkie'. Proficiency increases with applied effort. I also find being one generation behind on hardware avoids a lot of problems.
Once you get beyond the 'fear' of leaving the MS mother-ship, things get a lot easier.
Accustomed to the cli in DOS/Windows, switching to Linux was a matter of absorbing a few commands vi the 80/20 rule. Now I'm a certified 'distro-junkie'. Proficiency increases with applied effort. I also find being one generation behind on hardware avoids a lot of problems.
Once you get beyond the 'fear' of leaving the MS mother-ship, things get a lot easier.
Comment from:
-deadcats [Visitor]
I thought this was a wonderful article. The closest I've seen to this great advice, was posted in a SuSE forum a couple years back to an everyday complainer (and I mean EVERY DAY he complained!). It went something like this: "Until you are willing to quit complaining that, "it works like this-or-that in Windows," until you are ready to quit trying to make Linux work like Windows, and until you are willing to learn the Linux way of doing things, you will NEVER be successful with Linux."
Again; a wonderful article. Thank you very much.
regards,
-dc
That's a poor paraphrase of the original post, but it gets the idea across.
Again; a wonderful article. Thank you very much.
regards,
-dc
That's a poor paraphrase of the original post, but it gets the idea across.
Comment from:
ijon [Visitor]
yeah. nice article. like it
Comment from:
I disagree [Visitor]
take 2
C'mon you guys, stop kissing each other and boosting your egos.
Pete is just saying that newbies should make more efforts and take the time to actually read books about Linux to understand how it works.
But, like "O", I really wonder why Pete even bothers. Why????
1 - If it's because he cares about Linux and wishes a wider adoption of his favorite OS, then… I believe his complaining attitude is just the wrong strategy. Yes. If what he wants is massive adoption of his favorite OS on the desktop, he should know that Linux distributions have to be better than Windows and Mac on every aspects for that to happen, Linux distributions have to create even better strategies (if the books are so great, just turn them into help files or whatever!!!).
Do you know one single business or enterprise (whether for money OR NOT) that got successful saying to people : you're to lazy or stupid, that's why you don't get it or that’s why you don’t like us….??? Or by whining/complaining that people don’t try harder to understand how their product is the best??? Clearly, if something doesn’t get successful, there are **flaws in the strategy**, misunderstanding of the sociocultural context, misunderstanding uf the infrastructures, musunderstandng of human psychology, or whatever.
2- But if Pete complains just to complain, and doesn,t care about massive adoption of Linux on the desktop, than : ???????????? Really, what's the point??? Just forget about the Newbies! Forget about them. Have fun with your Linux and basta!
Pete is a romantic artist, alone in the dark, complaining that nobody understands him in his incommensurable greatness.
Get modern, Pete. Switch to the PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu or Mandriva’s Philosophy.
I’m with them all the way. Be simpler than windows, simpler than simpler, simpler than mac OS, yet more powerful, with layers of complexities for those who need it…
No need for books. Simple, simple simple simple. And many many many many many good apps (better than windows’). That’s the real key.
C'mon you guys, stop kissing each other and boosting your egos.
Pete is just saying that newbies should make more efforts and take the time to actually read books about Linux to understand how it works.
But, like "O", I really wonder why Pete even bothers. Why????
1 - If it's because he cares about Linux and wishes a wider adoption of his favorite OS, then… I believe his complaining attitude is just the wrong strategy. Yes. If what he wants is massive adoption of his favorite OS on the desktop, he should know that Linux distributions have to be better than Windows and Mac on every aspects for that to happen, Linux distributions have to create even better strategies (if the books are so great, just turn them into help files or whatever!!!).
Do you know one single business or enterprise (whether for money OR NOT) that got successful saying to people : you're to lazy or stupid, that's why you don't get it or that’s why you don’t like us….??? Or by whining/complaining that people don’t try harder to understand how their product is the best??? Clearly, if something doesn’t get successful, there are **flaws in the strategy**, misunderstanding of the sociocultural context, misunderstanding uf the infrastructures, musunderstandng of human psychology, or whatever.
2- But if Pete complains just to complain, and doesn,t care about massive adoption of Linux on the desktop, than : ???????????? Really, what's the point??? Just forget about the Newbies! Forget about them. Have fun with your Linux and basta!
Pete is a romantic artist, alone in the dark, complaining that nobody understands him in his incommensurable greatness.
Get modern, Pete. Switch to the PCLinuxOS, Ubuntu or Mandriva’s Philosophy.
I’m with them all the way. Be simpler than windows, simpler than simpler, simpler than mac OS, yet more powerful, with layers of complexities for those who need it…
No need for books. Simple, simple simple simple. And many many many many many good apps (better than windows’). That’s the real key.
Comment from:
thmo [Visitor]
I stopped reading pretty early on. I use my computer to watch movies simply because I don't own (and never have owned) a TV. Don't even know what this tivo thing might be.
Face it, people will use desktop computers for just about anything. Games, movies, music, recording, video editing, word processing, accounting, email, the list goes on and on. It's damn convenient to have all that on one machine. Why own countless pieces of junk when one box will do it all?
Face it, people will use desktop computers for just about anything. Games, movies, music, recording, video editing, word processing, accounting, email, the list goes on and on. It's damn convenient to have all that on one machine. Why own countless pieces of junk when one box will do it all?
Comment from:
rocky [Visitor]
I suppose newbies should just try harder. But I think most of them won't. Linux gets a bad rap from the numbers that try and fail to get over the first hump.
I chose my distro based on my perception of three things: it's popular, it's well supported, and it's completely free (and always will be). One and two are related. The more people who are using it, the more likely I'll be able to get good support.
Ubuntu fit the bill for me. I committed to put it on my new computer and simply force myself to use it, learn it, find a way to work it out. Too many newbies don't want to make that kind of commitment, and at the first little bump in the road, they run back to what they already know: Windows.
I suggest that when you do recommend Linux to a newbie, recommend a distro that has a ton of users and a ton of support. For example, the Ubuntu community is large and active in the Ubuntu forums, and third-party support like Automatix2, Easy Ubuntu, and the fantastic "Unofficial Ubuntu Starter Guide" just might be enough to get the newbie over those first bumps and into enjoying their new Linux OS.
I chose my distro based on my perception of three things: it's popular, it's well supported, and it's completely free (and always will be). One and two are related. The more people who are using it, the more likely I'll be able to get good support.
Ubuntu fit the bill for me. I committed to put it on my new computer and simply force myself to use it, learn it, find a way to work it out. Too many newbies don't want to make that kind of commitment, and at the first little bump in the road, they run back to what they already know: Windows.
I suggest that when you do recommend Linux to a newbie, recommend a distro that has a ton of users and a ton of support. For example, the Ubuntu community is large and active in the Ubuntu forums, and third-party support like Automatix2, Easy Ubuntu, and the fantastic "Unofficial Ubuntu Starter Guide" just might be enough to get the newbie over those first bumps and into enjoying their new Linux OS.
Comment from:
mr havercamp [Visitor]
· http://www.enviroplaces.com
I think you'd find that if someone installed windows in the same way they install linux (i.e. by downloading it, burning it to a cd and running the install) I'd think you'd find you would get the same inane questions for many common windows problems.
My sister came to me about 6 months ago complaining about how windows XP was slow. The problems; 1) the genuine advantage or whatever it is called kept popping up, 2) the machine was so riddled with virii that it would take forever to carry out a single task, 3) she has no idea about computers.
Lazy? sure, but not an uncommon type of user. I told her to send me her machine and stuck Ubuntu on it. But the complaints keep coming; 1) I can't save my documents to .doc (using OO.org), 2) I don't know how to attach my documents to an email (she's using thunderbird which is apparently a lot different to outlook express).
What's my point? Well there were complaints about Windows and there are now complaints about Linux. However, for me, fixing the Linux problems is far easier than cleaning up the Windows mess. Let's face it; low end users are going to complain about problems no matter what they use but it's up to us, the linux power users, admins, programmers to help these people with clear, concise answers.
The codecs link was a great example of the wrong way to go about helping a new user; confusing them even further. I'm sure the WMV codecs resolution could be summarized in 3 or 4 concise points but here we see x number of opinions about su-ing, the use of sudo vs su, and so on...
My sister came to me about 6 months ago complaining about how windows XP was slow. The problems; 1) the genuine advantage or whatever it is called kept popping up, 2) the machine was so riddled with virii that it would take forever to carry out a single task, 3) she has no idea about computers.
Lazy? sure, but not an uncommon type of user. I told her to send me her machine and stuck Ubuntu on it. But the complaints keep coming; 1) I can't save my documents to .doc (using OO.org), 2) I don't know how to attach my documents to an email (she's using thunderbird which is apparently a lot different to outlook express).
What's my point? Well there were complaints about Windows and there are now complaints about Linux. However, for me, fixing the Linux problems is far easier than cleaning up the Windows mess. Let's face it; low end users are going to complain about problems no matter what they use but it's up to us, the linux power users, admins, programmers to help these people with clear, concise answers.
The codecs link was a great example of the wrong way to go about helping a new user; confusing them even further. I'm sure the WMV codecs resolution could be summarized in 3 or 4 concise points but here we see x number of opinions about su-ing, the use of sudo vs su, and so on...
Comment from:
Steve [Visitor]
Damn, I wish I could get the people I work with to read this... LOL (geek by trade)... Several good points in there. Someone mentioned VIM and the like as needing to be on the prerequisite list... I agree... should be exercised in the M$ world as well... I maintain that DOS should be COMPLETELY understood, but I know for the average user, this simply isnt going to happen. Problem is, the younger techs at my job dont even understand half of what theyre LOOKING at in a console, nevermind how to use it, and insist that it can all be done with the GUI. How many times do I have to prove them wrong? Not knowing how the 'under-the-hood' mechanics of how an OS works, regardless of flavor, is a big problem in the computer world these days... without this information, it becomes too 'easy' to blindly accept what a GUI is giving you for a response to something you do, or that 'randomly' may happen... I dont see this as an OS-dependent problem. It affects them all. DOS and linux shells have always required us to actually READ, something ELSE that people dont do anymore. Too many pretty little pictures. Clicky here, clicky there. Granted, as stated in the article, this cant be put on the GUI, but the next prerequisite should be that you are not allowed to use KDE or the like until you have a full understanding (or close to) of the guts. Hanging around in a GUI is persuasive to a newbie, because it is dumbed down like Windows, and looks pretty and all, but is not conducive to learning anything about how it works. I STAY in a console, even when KDE is running. Doesnt EVERYONE? Thanks for reading :)
Comment from:
Mike [Visitor]
· http://None
First of all, thank you for your opinion and for the way you so eloquently put it. I appreciate your opening up this line of discussion the way you did. Thank you very much.
I would like to add (from the level; a step above the noob) that there are things I wish Linux would do because I am stuck in a third world country (meaning no internet, no apt-get, emerge, etc..) and from the stand point of having read many books (much to my advantage) to have gotten to where I'm at, and finally that I use Linux "Because it's not Windows". So my problem (not my complaint) is that it’s very hard to get the software installed that I need to do the work I do.
Research and documentation is what I do. OOo is good but lacking (only because I have meager hardware), everything else doesn't cut it by a long shot, for various reasons. I also need to take the documentation I do from my research and present it in ways that need multimedia. I still haven’t found a Linux that will do this fully to the level I require (once again my problem not my complaint). It is, however, getting closer and closer all the time. By the way, I also have been using Linux since Red Hat 5.0. My previous background was strictly DOS (PCDOS), and I went around for a while believing that DOS should be the only way to use computers. Maybe this is why I wasn’t afraid of CLI and felt right at home with Vi. I too believe that these should be basic requirements before embarking on the Linux adventure, a the very least nano. So I have been able to adapt rather slowly because I am not a programmer but simply an end user that never gave up.
So what’s my point?
Point is that Linux (in my opinion) needs to be able to do the things that other OS’s do without becoming other OS’s, without having to hack on it so much. Not that I mind installing from source most of the time, and fiddling with a config file here and there. But there are little things like: these codec’s for this player but not for that one. This media player for one thing, another media player for the other, dependencies that even with dpkg are not being met because I don’t have this package or that… Although I realize that because of the open standards that’s a hard thing to do, so I’m forgiving and it keeps me going. I guess I just sometimes feel brutalized by trying to find ways to make things work without internet. It is a very frustrating experience. I love Linux, and want to see it used more. I am so thrilled that it’s being emphasized here that Linux is not windows (never was, never will be); I would shudder at the thought of it ever coming to that. But it does need some polishing that would make it more have more versatility. (not that windows even closely approximates refinement) That is to say have a larger user base. I’d just like to point out that I wouldn’t be writing this if I did have internet, it’s just something that has come to my attention since my internship out in the wild.
Thank you for allowing me to post my humble opinion. Keep up the good work. Thank you Pete.
I would like to add (from the level; a step above the noob) that there are things I wish Linux would do because I am stuck in a third world country (meaning no internet, no apt-get, emerge, etc..) and from the stand point of having read many books (much to my advantage) to have gotten to where I'm at, and finally that I use Linux "Because it's not Windows". So my problem (not my complaint) is that it’s very hard to get the software installed that I need to do the work I do.
Research and documentation is what I do. OOo is good but lacking (only because I have meager hardware), everything else doesn't cut it by a long shot, for various reasons. I also need to take the documentation I do from my research and present it in ways that need multimedia. I still haven’t found a Linux that will do this fully to the level I require (once again my problem not my complaint). It is, however, getting closer and closer all the time. By the way, I also have been using Linux since Red Hat 5.0. My previous background was strictly DOS (PCDOS), and I went around for a while believing that DOS should be the only way to use computers. Maybe this is why I wasn’t afraid of CLI and felt right at home with Vi. I too believe that these should be basic requirements before embarking on the Linux adventure, a the very least nano. So I have been able to adapt rather slowly because I am not a programmer but simply an end user that never gave up.
So what’s my point?
Point is that Linux (in my opinion) needs to be able to do the things that other OS’s do without becoming other OS’s, without having to hack on it so much. Not that I mind installing from source most of the time, and fiddling with a config file here and there. But there are little things like: these codec’s for this player but not for that one. This media player for one thing, another media player for the other, dependencies that even with dpkg are not being met because I don’t have this package or that… Although I realize that because of the open standards that’s a hard thing to do, so I’m forgiving and it keeps me going. I guess I just sometimes feel brutalized by trying to find ways to make things work without internet. It is a very frustrating experience. I love Linux, and want to see it used more. I am so thrilled that it’s being emphasized here that Linux is not windows (never was, never will be); I would shudder at the thought of it ever coming to that. But it does need some polishing that would make it more have more versatility. (not that windows even closely approximates refinement) That is to say have a larger user base. I’d just like to point out that I wouldn’t be writing this if I did have internet, it’s just something that has come to my attention since my internship out in the wild.
Thank you for allowing me to post my humble opinion. Keep up the good work. Thank you Pete.
Comment from:
DarkWraith007 [Visitor]
Hello to all.
I have a female friend who's about as big of a Linux geek as anyone can really get. She custom-compiled her own distro (based on Gentoo Linux), custom-compiled ALL her software, going through and modifying whatever source code she needed in order for things to work however she wanted (she takes Computer Science courses in college) and knows Linux pretty damn well. A fairly advanced user.
She's had many problems, most notably in two areas. One is hardware support. There isn't much of an equivalent of WinXP's simply "Plug and Play" for Linux. True its not even perfect in WinXP but it works, period. Macs are even better but that's almost a completely different beast.
The other area is compatibility. Undoubtedly, a program may require an older version of a certain file and will break if a newer version is used, but another program demands the newer file and will break if an older version is used, then your hardware router might not work one day because of something else you installed....
Don't even get me started on usability. Just try using just about any Linux distro without knowing the console, or what "root" is, or so forth. Good luck getting software to run, or installing software, or compiling from source.
Linux is an advanced kernel, by geeks, for geeks. That's it. Even the server people running Linux servers know the console inside and out, that's how they (should have) got their jobs.
Any attempt to get mainstream support for Linux on the desktop has to be with adopting standards across the board, for every distro. Or maybe, just maybe, offering some of the best features from each distro like security, usability, compatibility, etc, and combining them into a useable user distro? Ubuntu isn't perfect, but its a start. We need compatibility, and some standards, and support when we run into problems, and working driver files, and not making it such a f-in hassle to get linux versions of programs we want. We dont' wanna have to compile every program ourselves, we have neither the time nor the knowledge to do such things, we aren't all programmers. We are regular average people who just want a computer to do simple things on and have it work without BSing from snobby stuck-up geekheads like many of you are trying to be.
*phew*
Many of you should stop fighting amongst yourselves as to which has the "best" distro and get some standards in place, make them uniform, and offer services and support to newbies. Unified "download Linux versions of programs here" websites would be very nice as well.
I personally booted up Ubuntu, took me some minor tweaking (software-preferences) to get my wireless adapter working, then I was online! But then the biggest thing was "oh I wanna download this thing but where's the Linux download?" The file in question was Portable GAIM (yes I know its on the distro but I wanted to see how easy it was to get programs). Its open source, easily available, yet I couldn't find a damn link ANYWHERE for the linux version of it. Then you have to get the right files, and make sure its compatible with your distro, etc etc. Whereas with Windows, if its a .exe file made after the year 1999, you can damn well be 99% sure it will run in WinXP unless its specifically designed for DOS or Win95 even. Most of the stuff works, its called STANDARDS. Hate M$ but its a decent thing at least.
I use WinXP, Home Edition (Pro didn't have any benefits I needed, I can encrypt my own files, with free open-source software, tyvm). The irony is I use Firefox, GAIM, GimpShop, and a host of other open-source and freeware programs, all the time. AntiVir for Antivirus, uTorrent (love it, best ever!) ^_^, as well as ZoneAlarm, and a few more.
CD Burner XP, a recent program that does CD burning, previously nothing freeware was even close to the capability of Nero Burning ROM yet this project seems very capable of doing most common cd-burning tasks. I'm glad it was made!
Cooperate, collaborate, and conquer the world. You all can do so if you adhere to some standards, some common set of files that should be in EVERY major distro that will make sure stuff works, and works well, just like a .exe file in windows. GTK+ is a start, now finish the job!
I have a female friend who's about as big of a Linux geek as anyone can really get. She custom-compiled her own distro (based on Gentoo Linux), custom-compiled ALL her software, going through and modifying whatever source code she needed in order for things to work however she wanted (she takes Computer Science courses in college) and knows Linux pretty damn well. A fairly advanced user.
She's had many problems, most notably in two areas. One is hardware support. There isn't much of an equivalent of WinXP's simply "Plug and Play" for Linux. True its not even perfect in WinXP but it works, period. Macs are even better but that's almost a completely different beast.
The other area is compatibility. Undoubtedly, a program may require an older version of a certain file and will break if a newer version is used, but another program demands the newer file and will break if an older version is used, then your hardware router might not work one day because of something else you installed....
Don't even get me started on usability. Just try using just about any Linux distro without knowing the console, or what "root" is, or so forth. Good luck getting software to run, or installing software, or compiling from source.
Linux is an advanced kernel, by geeks, for geeks. That's it. Even the server people running Linux servers know the console inside and out, that's how they (should have) got their jobs.
Any attempt to get mainstream support for Linux on the desktop has to be with adopting standards across the board, for every distro. Or maybe, just maybe, offering some of the best features from each distro like security, usability, compatibility, etc, and combining them into a useable user distro? Ubuntu isn't perfect, but its a start. We need compatibility, and some standards, and support when we run into problems, and working driver files, and not making it such a f-in hassle to get linux versions of programs we want. We dont' wanna have to compile every program ourselves, we have neither the time nor the knowledge to do such things, we aren't all programmers. We are regular average people who just want a computer to do simple things on and have it work without BSing from snobby stuck-up geekheads like many of you are trying to be.
*phew*
Many of you should stop fighting amongst yourselves as to which has the "best" distro and get some standards in place, make them uniform, and offer services and support to newbies. Unified "download Linux versions of programs here" websites would be very nice as well.
I personally booted up Ubuntu, took me some minor tweaking (software-preferences) to get my wireless adapter working, then I was online! But then the biggest thing was "oh I wanna download this thing but where's the Linux download?" The file in question was Portable GAIM (yes I know its on the distro but I wanted to see how easy it was to get programs). Its open source, easily available, yet I couldn't find a damn link ANYWHERE for the linux version of it. Then you have to get the right files, and make sure its compatible with your distro, etc etc. Whereas with Windows, if its a .exe file made after the year 1999, you can damn well be 99% sure it will run in WinXP unless its specifically designed for DOS or Win95 even. Most of the stuff works, its called STANDARDS. Hate M$ but its a decent thing at least.
I use WinXP, Home Edition (Pro didn't have any benefits I needed, I can encrypt my own files, with free open-source software, tyvm). The irony is I use Firefox, GAIM, GimpShop, and a host of other open-source and freeware programs, all the time. AntiVir for Antivirus, uTorrent (love it, best ever!) ^_^, as well as ZoneAlarm, and a few more.
CD Burner XP, a recent program that does CD burning, previously nothing freeware was even close to the capability of Nero Burning ROM yet this project seems very capable of doing most common cd-burning tasks. I'm glad it was made!
Cooperate, collaborate, and conquer the world. You all can do so if you adhere to some standards, some common set of files that should be in EVERY major distro that will make sure stuff works, and works well, just like a .exe file in windows. GTK+ is a start, now finish the job!
Comment from:
Penguin Pete [Member]
· http://www.penguinpetes.com/
@"I disagree"
who writes:
"Interesting to see which distributions are at the top of distrowatch : Ubuntu, OpenSuse, Mandriva, etc. : all the easier to use Linux distros."
And yet the case I link to is somebody learning Ubuntu. We're not talking about the new users frustrated trying to compile Linux From Scratch, here. We all have the sense enough to warn them off of the high-powered stuff and into the easy beginner distros. And we get the same problems anyway.
Mandriva is installed on one of my machines, I've run it and loved it and it's one I recommend to new users as well. But I notice no matter HOW easy we make a computer, the complaints about how hard to learn it is remains a constant. I've been watching this since the 9-to-5 days of DOS C:> prompts before Windows.
who writes:
"Interesting to see which distributions are at the top of distrowatch : Ubuntu, OpenSuse, Mandriva, etc. : all the easier to use Linux distros."
And yet the case I link to is somebody learning Ubuntu. We're not talking about the new users frustrated trying to compile Linux From Scratch, here. We all have the sense enough to warn them off of the high-powered stuff and into the easy beginner distros. And we get the same problems anyway.
Mandriva is installed on one of my machines, I've run it and loved it and it's one I recommend to new users as well. But I notice no matter HOW easy we make a computer, the complaints about how hard to learn it is remains a constant. I've been watching this since the 9-to-5 days of DOS C:> prompts before Windows.
Comment from:
Rodemuts [Visitor]
I Strongly disagree with this article. I've been using Linux for more than 5 years now, because i like the idea behind it. But to be honest, i've read a pile of books, spend a lot of time online, and folowed linuxcourses many miles from home,
but i'm still having trouble using it. It's not that i can't get it working, i can, but keeping it working is a problem.
Almost every time i want to do something that i dont do to often, like playing a movie, i have to spend a hour or so getting it working, something my guest hate also, and it keeps them from trying linux. I understand that very well, afcourse this isnt linux fault, but it does keep lots of desktopusers from switching to linux.
Im getting a new job next month wich includes a windows laptop with the system of the school on it, and honestly i dont mind, cause if i'm at work i just don't have the time, to spend hours hacking, to get it al working... sorry
but i'm still having trouble using it. It's not that i can't get it working, i can, but keeping it working is a problem.
Almost every time i want to do something that i dont do to often, like playing a movie, i have to spend a hour or so getting it working, something my guest hate also, and it keeps them from trying linux. I understand that very well, afcourse this isnt linux fault, but it does keep lots of desktopusers from switching to linux.
Im getting a new job next month wich includes a windows laptop with the system of the school on it, and honestly i dont mind, cause if i'm at work i just don't have the time, to spend hours hacking, to get it al working... sorry
Comment from:
Charles Mauch [Visitor]
· http://xtermin.us
Your article reminded me of a classic essay on the unix interface and the people who prefer it.
Thomas Scoville's
Unix as Literature"
And I loved the article. I found myself nodding in agreement (or rather in mutual commiseration) through the entire length of it.
Thomas Scoville's
Unix as Literature"
And I loved the article. I found myself nodding in agreement (or rather in mutual commiseration) through the entire length of it.
Comment from:
Steve [Visitor]
I'd like to touch on something I didnt really get to do an 'IMO' on... the whole multimedia example...
This digs into that whole 'to register or not to register' thing that has all of us standing on our toes, pondering the universe, and wondering if fusion really WILL solve the world energy crisis.
The problems such as one player being able to open a given file when the next has no clue what to do with it was solved with windows early on, however MS dug themselves a hole that only got deeper and deeper as new releases came out (with no bottom in sight). The registry.
A software pipeline such as the registry is a good idea in some ways, because it can chain clusters of applications to the files that a user would open, and transparently allow a user to open whatever file they want with whichever application they want. HOWEVER...
It is a nasty game that, fortunately, linux hasnt gotten itself into, because something like a registry opens up its own complete can of worms, one of which is partially responsible for the security problems in windows. Im fairly convinced that it cant be done both ways, there really cant be a happy medium on this one. It kinda sucks for the users, but those that are used to it, are well aware of it, and know how to work around it.
There in lies the whole reason for this article, no? The newbies don't completely get why things are the way they are, and dont yet have the tools in their arsenal yet to figure out the workarounds.
Like anything worthwhile, it takes time to learn linux, and as it was said, show me one user that actually DID learn it, and then turned his/her nose up at it... It usually doesnt happen. Everyone I know that has converted still does have a partition with windows on it, but thats just because there are just some very specific things that linux is not geared for just yet. Besides, is being bilingual in the computer sense such a bad thing anyway?
This digs into that whole 'to register or not to register' thing that has all of us standing on our toes, pondering the universe, and wondering if fusion really WILL solve the world energy crisis.
The problems such as one player being able to open a given file when the next has no clue what to do with it was solved with windows early on, however MS dug themselves a hole that only got deeper and deeper as new releases came out (with no bottom in sight). The registry.
A software pipeline such as the registry is a good idea in some ways, because it can chain clusters of applications to the files that a user would open, and transparently allow a user to open whatever file they want with whichever application they want. HOWEVER...
It is a nasty game that, fortunately, linux hasnt gotten itself into, because something like a registry opens up its own complete can of worms, one of which is partially responsible for the security problems in windows. Im fairly convinced that it cant be done both ways, there really cant be a happy medium on this one. It kinda sucks for the users, but those that are used to it, are well aware of it, and know how to work around it.
There in lies the whole reason for this article, no? The newbies don't completely get why things are the way they are, and dont yet have the tools in their arsenal yet to figure out the workarounds.
Like anything worthwhile, it takes time to learn linux, and as it was said, show me one user that actually DID learn it, and then turned his/her nose up at it... It usually doesnt happen. Everyone I know that has converted still does have a partition with windows on it, but thats just because there are just some very specific things that linux is not geared for just yet. Besides, is being bilingual in the computer sense such a bad thing anyway?
Comment from:
Freierfall [Visitor]
· http://www.freierflug.dl.am
@Rodemuts:
" and honestly i dont mind, cause if i'm at work i just don't have the time, to spend hours hacking, to get it al working... sorry"
I use Windows as often as Linux, and i Need often the same time to get smth. working on Windows and on linux.
If linux is running like you want it to, it will go on running.
If Windows runs like you want it to, you only have to wait until it crashes, an new bug comes out, an new virus crashes your system or... or... or... and you have to build it up from the begining.
(thats no anti-windows statement, i use it, too. not because i like it, but because i have to, and i also don't mind. but because of another reason.
Someone talked about the complains the user have both about linux and windows.
the problem is, the normal user doesn't want to know how the computer works. It should just work.
Unfourtunately you can't force everyone who's using a computer do know how it works.
" and honestly i dont mind, cause if i'm at work i just don't have the time, to spend hours hacking, to get it al working... sorry"
I use Windows as often as Linux, and i Need often the same time to get smth. working on Windows and on linux.
If linux is running like you want it to, it will go on running.
If Windows runs like you want it to, you only have to wait until it crashes, an new bug comes out, an new virus crashes your system or... or... or... and you have to build it up from the begining.
(thats no anti-windows statement, i use it, too. not because i like it, but because i have to, and i also don't mind. but because of another reason.
Someone talked about the complains the user have both about linux and windows.
the problem is, the normal user doesn't want to know how the computer works. It should just work.
Unfourtunately you can't force everyone who's using a computer do know how it works.
Comment from:
Jeff Rollin [Visitor]
· http://latedeveloper.org.uk
OK, I just can't let that one through.
"Unfortunately you can't force everyone who's using a computer to know how it works".
Actually, maybe we should. I mean, people do it with cars. Oh, yes, they do. They may never learn how to fix one, but they DO know how to drive one. Either that, or sooner they're going to get in trouble with the law. Or worse.
Regardless, this "I don't want to know how a computer works, I just want to use it" "meme" is crap. Imagine if we said that about pens. It would be pretty hard to get people to communicate effectively if we just let everyone scrawl away in their own sweet way without learning how to write properly.
"Unfortunately you can't force everyone who's using a computer to know how it works".
Actually, maybe we should. I mean, people do it with cars. Oh, yes, they do. They may never learn how to fix one, but they DO know how to drive one. Either that, or sooner they're going to get in trouble with the law. Or worse.
Regardless, this "I don't want to know how a computer works, I just want to use it" "meme" is crap. Imagine if we said that about pens. It would be pretty hard to get people to communicate effectively if we just let everyone scrawl away in their own sweet way without learning how to write properly.
Comment from:
Penguin Pete [Member]
· http://www.penguinpetes.com/
@Jeff Rollin
!!!!! Somebody else finally said it! I at last can be proven to have not lived in vain!
Mod parent up! Oh, wait, this isn't Slashdot... unless (judging by the color scheme), it's 'OMG! PONIES!' day...
!!!!! Somebody else finally said it! I at last can be proven to have not lived in vain!
Mod parent up! Oh, wait, this isn't Slashdot... unless (judging by the color scheme), it's 'OMG! PONIES!' day...
Comment from:
Freierfall [Visitor]
· http://www.freierflug.dl.am
Jeff Rollin:
"Actually, maybe we should"
I didn't know we are able to to that.
On the one hand, its similar to cars and driving license, but on the other, with a car you can easy harm other people. with a computer, its much more complicated (esp. if you dont know, how it works...)
sorry for OT.
"Actually, maybe we should"
I didn't know we are able to to that.
On the one hand, its similar to cars and driving license, but on the other, with a car you can easy harm other people. with a computer, its much more complicated (esp. if you dont know, how it works...)
sorry for OT.
Comment from:
Jeff Rollin [Visitor]
· http://latedeveloper.org.uk
Freierfall:
I don't seriously believe that we should force people to get a licence to use a computer because they're as dangerous as cars. Nevertheless, you DO have to learn to drive them. And computers may not be dangerous, but they ARE complicated. Not because computer experts want to make others suffer, but because it goes with the territory. If you make something that plays CDs, it is sufficient to have maybe 10 controls. If you make something that can play CDs one minute, balance your chequebook the next, blast imaginary starships out of an imaginary sky the next, etc., /of course/ it is going to be complicated!
I don't seriously believe that we should force people to get a licence to use a computer because they're as dangerous as cars. Nevertheless, you DO have to learn to drive them. And computers may not be dangerous, but they ARE complicated. Not because computer experts want to make others suffer, but because it goes with the territory. If you make something that plays CDs, it is sufficient to have maybe 10 controls. If you make something that can play CDs one minute, balance your chequebook the next, blast imaginary starships out of an imaginary sky the next, etc., /of course/ it is going to be complicated!
Comment from:
OS Junkie [Visitor]
My argument regarding Windows vs Linux has always boiled down to this:
Windows opted for convenience, at the expense of security.
Linux opted for security, at the expense of convenience.
A windows environment that will blindly launch an unknown program in an email "just to be convenient" is an invitation for disaster, from a security viewpoint.
Unix is a business, working OS, and it's reflected in the level of knowledge required to make it run properly. Don't try to "dumb it down" so that every person that can click a mouse can use it!
People should evaluate their choice for an OS based on what they intend to do with it, and determine their own balance of convenience vs security. (vs cost vs freedom vs .....)
Each OS has a place in our lives, and most Linux-folk I know, also have a Windows box. How many real car enthusiasts have only 1 car?
Windows opted for convenience, at the expense of security.
Linux opted for security, at the expense of convenience.
A windows environment that will blindly launch an unknown program in an email "just to be convenient" is an invitation for disaster, from a security viewpoint.
Unix is a business, working OS, and it's reflected in the level of knowledge required to make it run properly. Don't try to "dumb it down" so that every person that can click a mouse can use it!
People should evaluate their choice for an OS based on what they intend to do with it, and determine their own balance of convenience vs security. (vs cost vs freedom vs .....)
Each OS has a place in our lives, and most Linux-folk I know, also have a Windows box. How many real car enthusiasts have only 1 car?
Comment from:
Karl [Visitor]
The author of this article says "I don't know where this idea that computers should be movie players".
I used to think only a moron could ever say anything even close to this. Now as I read this article and I can see it featuring normal English grammar and spelling I have to admit that I was wrong: not only morons can say this.
I used to think only a moron could ever say anything even close to this. Now as I read this article and I can see it featuring normal English grammar and spelling I have to admit that I was wrong: not only morons can say this.
Comment from:
Jack Carroll [Visitor]
I've been using the command line since long before Microsoft existed. I've never been able to adapt to Windows, and use it only under because I'm stuck with it at the office. But we just got the green light to start testing OpenOffice.org.
Comment from:
bluenevus [Visitor]
Expectations...
If someone expects Linux to be like Windows, than maybe Windows is the OS for them. Its not about which OS is better, its about which OS is better for the consumer. If the consumer wants to watch TV on the PC...so what? Isn't that what makes the computer so cool? You can watch video at one moment, surf the net the next, edit a document then crunch numbers. PC offers versatility. When I travel, my laptop serves as a DVD player, internet station, music studio, productivity station etc etc. Why should I limit myself because an OS does not support what I want to do?
Simple is relative. I watched a seasoned Windows user struggle using a Mac. Isn't Mac supposed to be the simplest of all? Its all relative. If Mac or Linux or Windows works for the user than it is the right OS.
I run linux right now. It puts the "romance" back in computing. However, it is a novelty. I would never take my Linux laptop on a business trip. I need to rely on compatibility with what most of the world is doing. With that said, I have older laptops that Win2k and above will just come to a crawl. Therefore, for me the lightweight Linux such as Vector, DSL and Puppy offers a good alternative to Win 9X. I get to run modern software with a decent interface. For me, it is the best OS to suit that need. The point is, they all serve a purpose and that purpose is based on consumer need and the ability to meet that demand. Expecting an OS to be something its not will result in inevitable failure.
So, get real Linux lovers! Guess what, its not the answer for everything. That goes the same for Mac lovers and of course Windows lovers. Thank God for the rest of us moderates, we understand the value of choice. Maybe you Linux elitist should get a life and stop taking the OS choice so personal. Its just an...OS.
If someone expects Linux to be like Windows, than maybe Windows is the OS for them. Its not about which OS is better, its about which OS is better for the consumer. If the consumer wants to watch TV on the PC...so what? Isn't that what makes the computer so cool? You can watch video at one moment, surf the net the next, edit a document then crunch numbers. PC offers versatility. When I travel, my laptop serves as a DVD player, internet station, music studio, productivity station etc etc. Why should I limit myself because an OS does not support what I want to do?
Simple is relative. I watched a seasoned Windows user struggle using a Mac. Isn't Mac supposed to be the simplest of all? Its all relative. If Mac or Linux or Windows works for the user than it is the right OS.
I run linux right now. It puts the "romance" back in computing. However, it is a novelty. I would never take my Linux laptop on a business trip. I need to rely on compatibility with what most of the world is doing. With that said, I have older laptops that Win2k and above will just come to a crawl. Therefore, for me the lightweight Linux such as Vector, DSL and Puppy offers a good alternative to Win 9X. I get to run modern software with a decent interface. For me, it is the best OS to suit that need. The point is, they all serve a purpose and that purpose is based on consumer need and the ability to meet that demand. Expecting an OS to be something its not will result in inevitable failure.
So, get real Linux lovers! Guess what, its not the answer for everything. That goes the same for Mac lovers and of course Windows lovers. Thank God for the rest of us moderates, we understand the value of choice. Maybe you Linux elitist should get a life and stop taking the OS choice so personal. Its just an...OS.
Comment from:
Jeff Rollin [Visitor]
· http://latedeveloper.org.uk
"So, get real Linux lovers! Guess what, its not the answer for everything. That goes the same for Mac lovers and of course Windows lovers. Thank God for the rest of us moderates, we understand the value of choice. Maybe you Linux elitist should get a life and stop taking the OS choice so personal. Its just an...OS."
It's not the OS we take personally, it's the "get real" comments from "moderates".
The point of Linux is that it is infinitely flexible - the difference between a Linux office machine, a Linux server, and a Linux development workstation is that the office machine will have OpenOffice, the server will have Apache, and the development workstation will have GCC. Yes, that's simplifying to avoid a long post. The difference between "server" and "workstation" versions of Windows is a registry key or two.
It's not the OS we take personally, it's the "get real" comments from "moderates".
The point of Linux is that it is infinitely flexible - the difference between a Linux office machine, a Linux server, and a Linux development workstation is that the office machine will have OpenOffice, the server will have Apache, and the development workstation will have GCC. Yes, that's simplifying to avoid a long post. The difference between "server" and "workstation" versions of Windows is a registry key or two.
Comment from:
bluenevus [Visitor]
That narrow view from Linux lovers like you is why Linux has such a small share of the Consumer and Business market. The point is, its not the best answer. It is an answer along with any other OS to a consumer need.
Like I said, get real. Linux isn't the second coming of Christ. Equally, Windows is not the apocalypse of OS. Believe it or not, there is a choice. Like I said, I run linux on some machines because it serves a good purpose. I run XP on other machines because it serves a purpose. I even like to play around with Haiku...it serves a purpose.
This absolute relationship is pathetic. For people like you its on or off, black or white...for the rest of us there is everything in between.
Like I said, get real. Linux isn't the second coming of Christ. Equally, Windows is not the apocalypse of OS. Believe it or not, there is a choice. Like I said, I run linux on some machines because it serves a good purpose. I run XP on other machines because it serves a purpose. I even like to play around with Haiku...it serves a purpose.
This absolute relationship is pathetic. For people like you its on or off, black or white...for the rest of us there is everything in between.
Comment from:
hondaman [Visitor]
I honest to God am wondering where to start with this article. No offense, but you Pete, are a bigger moron than your alternate reality mind has lead you to believe. Again, no offense.
Lets run down the bullet points:
1: "I stumbled upon it whilst Googling to find out the same thing: how to play movies in Microsoft's WMV format on Linux." Why are you wasting your valuable coding time to watch movies? Computers are for coding, remember? You bash the clearly confused newbie for wondering how to do the same thing youre trying to do.
2: "When we use our own (and the public's) non-proprietary formats, we never have this problem." I guess you forgot the "format" mozilla has for submitting patches. Debian sure has a problem with that. Taking your argument to a one based on principle, if open/free formats didnt have any problems with each other, we wouldnt have 500+ linux distros, a half dozen "contender" office suites, word processors, and their associated, incompatible formats. OSS formats have the same problem proprietary formats do: compatibility. YOu obviously are lacking perspective. No offense of course.
3: "even Windows has folders galore, then how have you even gotten this far?" How many "folders" do you have to deal with in a linux install? Linux has come a long way, in that its almost fully automated. You have to TRY and not install linux sometimes. So when a windows user, who has used an OS that defined the look, use, and operation of folders, and throw him in a linux environment which pretends to have folders, YOU CAN EXPECT HIM TO USE THEM THE SAME WAY! If linux is going to copy windows in the look of folders (which it has), dont expect said user to be confused when they dont act the same way. Obviously you have graduated from the use of folders years ago, and hence dont appreciate the valid frustration newbies are going through. By the way, arent you supposed to be coding right now? No offense or sarcasm of course.
4: "Any book with "Linux" on the cover plus any one of "non-geek", "dummy", "idiot", "beginner", "basic", or "easy" will get you miles farther than all the Googles and forum posts and chat conversations in the world." Werent you using google to figure out how to play .wmv in linux? Did you get tired of reading your personal linux library looking for the answer? Perhaps google was better and faster afterall? I own several linux books myself, and I agree that they are a great resource. They alone arent the answer to every question however.
5: "Computers are difficult because they are powerful." Computers are easy when a good GUI is written to harness the power. MS realized this a long time ago, and has built an interface over the years that usually makes sense. A computer is only good for programing, clearly, but for the rest of us, computers are the platforms for real life productivity. The GUI is our interface to the computer. Weird, huh? It even STANDS for that: Graphical User Interface" Weird. Honestly not trying to insult your miles-above-average intellect, but perhaps linux DOES, in fact, need an interface that makes sense? Maybe the hundreds upon thousands of complaints about linux needing a better GUI arent, in fact, crying useless newbies who dont matter anyway?
6: "The key cliche here is "killing with kindness"." Its a good thing that all parents dont teach their kids to swim by throwing them in the ocean and hoping for the best. How many new users has linux lost because of ? I'd bet the house you dont care either. Not to be offensive, but YOU are in part the reason linux is stiffled. You have done your job in part, to make linux a job, not a platform to use and be productive on.
7: "Am I an elitist egghead who disdains anybody who isn't as smart about Linux as I am?"
The truth is in the sarcasm of your blog.
Lets run down the bullet points:
1: "I stumbled upon it whilst Googling to find out the same thing: how to play movies in Microsoft's WMV format on Linux." Why are you wasting your valuable coding time to watch movies? Computers are for coding, remember? You bash the clearly confused newbie for wondering how to do the same thing youre trying to do.
2: "When we use our own (and the public's) non-proprietary formats, we never have this problem." I guess you forgot the "format" mozilla has for submitting patches. Debian sure has a problem with that. Taking your argument to a one based on principle, if open/free formats didnt have any problems with each other, we wouldnt have 500+ linux distros, a half dozen "contender" office suites, word processors, and their associated, incompatible formats. OSS formats have the same problem proprietary formats do: compatibility. YOu obviously are lacking perspective. No offense of course.
3: "even Windows has folders galore, then how have you even gotten this far?" How many "folders" do you have to deal with in a linux install? Linux has come a long way, in that its almost fully automated. You have to TRY and not install linux sometimes. So when a windows user, who has used an OS that defined the look, use, and operation of folders, and throw him in a linux environment which pretends to have folders, YOU CAN EXPECT HIM TO USE THEM THE SAME WAY! If linux is going to copy windows in the look of folders (which it has), dont expect said user to be confused when they dont act the same way. Obviously you have graduated from the use of folders years ago, and hence dont appreciate the valid frustration newbies are going through. By the way, arent you supposed to be coding right now? No offense or sarcasm of course.
4: "Any book with "Linux" on the cover plus any one of "non-geek", "dummy", "idiot", "beginner", "basic", or "easy" will get you miles farther than all the Googles and forum posts and chat conversations in the world." Werent you using google to figure out how to play .wmv in linux? Did you get tired of reading your personal linux library looking for the answer? Perhaps google was better and faster afterall? I own several linux books myself, and I agree that they are a great resource. They alone arent the answer to every question however.
5: "Computers are difficult because they are powerful." Computers are easy when a good GUI is written to harness the power. MS realized this a long time ago, and has built an interface over the years that usually makes sense. A computer is only good for programing, clearly, but for the rest of us, computers are the platforms for real life productivity. The GUI is our interface to the computer. Weird, huh? It even STANDS for that: Graphical User Interface" Weird. Honestly not trying to insult your miles-above-average intellect, but perhaps linux DOES, in fact, need an interface that makes sense? Maybe the hundreds upon thousands of complaints about linux needing a better GUI arent, in fact, crying useless newbies who dont matter anyway?
6: "The key cliche here is "killing with kindness"." Its a good thing that all parents dont teach their kids to swim by throwing them in the ocean and hoping for the best. How many new users has linux lost because of ? I'd bet the house you dont care either. Not to be offensive, but YOU are in part the reason linux is stiffled. You have done your job in part, to make linux a job, not a platform to use and be productive on.
7: "Am I an elitist egghead who disdains anybody who isn't as smart about Linux as I am?"
The truth is in the sarcasm of your blog.
Comment from:
Duckzeus [Visitor]
So lets see here, lets follow your logic....
Computers should be used to compile code and not for silly things like enhancing your life with multimedia entertainment and knowledge enhancement. God forbid we turn our computer into "TV sets". This whole vast internet thing is obviously useless and we should all revert to reading books for all our knowledge
You make alot of points about "linux apologists" trying to remake linux in windows image and as a result trying to make Linux so profoundly easy that any trained chimp could watch all the movies they want with nary a brain cell.
Sadly enough I agree with you on this point, in at least one respect, Linux isn't the problem with Linux. The problem with Linux is people like you that make up such a large part of the Linux community.
Those people who's first response to any question is a statement such as "why are you even using a computer?" I don't know you so I have to entertain the possibility that you may have actually been intending this statement to be an honest inquiry as to the posters reasons. But in this wonderful world of information we call the internet vocal intonations intended to convey different meanings don't come across so well (and by the way since I'm writing this in a handy graphical interface with color and graphics and everything rather than responding to an email in pine I'll surely be burned at the stake as a heretic). This inability to accurately convey intentions results in an interpretation of that statement as something along the lines of "Why are you even bothering to use a computer, clearly you lack even the dregs of rudimentary intelligence or you would have been able to intuitively grasp the nuances in the source code and solved the issue yourself without disrupting my work on my latest coding project"
This sort of response is nearly ALWAYS the initial response from any "elitist" Linux user to someone who poses a question. I say this from personal experience. I too was once a Linux "newbie" or Linux "Idiot" depending on which rank you are among the Linux "Elitists" Strangely enough I followed your suggestions without even needing them, first thing I did was jog down to B&N and grab a 5" thick tome named "Linux from start to the inevitable crushing of your soul" Or something equally daunting. I spent days installing, re-installing, tweaking, playing, re-installing, learning, etc..
Whoopee!! I've installed Linux!! Gee now to do something with it, I know I'll go browse the internet (Again I'm shallow, I like graphics and eye-pleasing colors so no lynx for me. Bring on the inquisitors) ...Well this sucks, for some reason I can't view this video of the shuttle launch. I'll refer to my handy 5" 'TFM'...hmm doesn't cover this browser, at least not on this distro. Google to the rescue...err not.
Everyone keeps telling me to RTFM but for F**k's sake nobody will tell me where the F'ing manual is.
This is exactly the frustration Linux newbies go through. To use your analogy of the car, we're not asking for you to take the doors off so we don't have to bother with opening them we're just asking for you to point out the damn handle.
Reading the post you used as an example I'll grudgingly agree that he/she was being a bit whiny and seemed to be requesting the annoying "give it to me on a silver platter" solution. A far better response might have been: "you might want to check out this excellent guide here, or read through this list here, or check out this forum it's been very helpful to me" Rather than inferring that his/her decision to use a computer to play videos was somehow demeaning the computer itself or insulting the lofty purpose of code compiling you've chosen to restrict your computer to. Honestly what business is it of yours whether he/she wants to use his/her computer to calculate pi to the 9 billionth digit or simply play annoying musak all day. It's his/her computer and let him/her do with it as they please. If you don't want to answer the question go compile a couple lines of code and munch on a hot pocket or something. Your elitist (notice no quotes this time) attitude is 90% of everything that is wrong with Linux.
Honestly how bout you go compile some code (code which i'm sure is simply a tool for compiling code, since that's all a computer is good for right) and let the rest of us enjoy the richness of color, sound, video, community, and (yes I'll dare say it) fun which in this posters not so humble opinion is exactly what the computers were made for, enriching the lives of humans and not compiling code.
Computers should be used to compile code and not for silly things like enhancing your life with multimedia entertainment and knowledge enhancement. God forbid we turn our computer into "TV sets". This whole vast internet thing is obviously useless and we should all revert to reading books for all our knowledge
You make alot of points about "linux apologists" trying to remake linux in windows image and as a result trying to make Linux so profoundly easy that any trained chimp could watch all the movies they want with nary a brain cell.
Sadly enough I agree with you on this point, in at least one respect, Linux isn't the problem with Linux. The problem with Linux is people like you that make up such a large part of the Linux community.
Those people who's first response to any question is a statement such as "why are you even using a computer?" I don't know you so I have to entertain the possibility that you may have actually been intending this statement to be an honest inquiry as to the posters reasons. But in this wonderful world of information we call the internet vocal intonations intended to convey different meanings don't come across so well (and by the way since I'm writing this in a handy graphical interface with color and graphics and everything rather than responding to an email in pine I'll surely be burned at the stake as a heretic). This inability to accurately convey intentions results in an interpretation of that statement as something along the lines of "Why are you even bothering to use a computer, clearly you lack even the dregs of rudimentary intelligence or you would have been able to intuitively grasp the nuances in the source code and solved the issue yourself without disrupting my work on my latest coding project"
This sort of response is nearly ALWAYS the initial response from any "elitist" Linux user to someone who poses a question. I say this from personal experience. I too was once a Linux "newbie" or Linux "Idiot" depending on which rank you are among the Linux "Elitists" Strangely enough I followed your suggestions without even needing them, first thing I did was jog down to B&N and grab a 5" thick tome named "Linux from start to the inevitable crushing of your soul" Or something equally daunting. I spent days installing, re-installing, tweaking, playing, re-installing, learning, etc..
Whoopee!! I've installed Linux!! Gee now to do something with it, I know I'll go browse the internet (Again I'm shallow, I like graphics and eye-pleasing colors so no lynx for me. Bring on the inquisitors) ...Well this sucks, for some reason I can't view this video of the shuttle launch. I'll refer to my handy 5" 'TFM'...hmm doesn't cover this browser, at least not on this distro. Google to the rescue...err not.
Everyone keeps telling me to RTFM but for F**k's sake nobody will tell me where the F'ing manual is.
This is exactly the frustration Linux newbies go through. To use your analogy of the car, we're not asking for you to take the doors off so we don't have to bother with opening them we're just asking for you to point out the damn handle.
Reading the post you used as an example I'll grudgingly agree that he/she was being a bit whiny and seemed to be requesting the annoying "give it to me on a silver platter" solution. A far better response might have been: "you might want to check out this excellent guide here, or read through this list here, or check out this forum it's been very helpful to me" Rather than inferring that his/her decision to use a computer to play videos was somehow demeaning the computer itself or insulting the lofty purpose of code compiling you've chosen to restrict your computer to. Honestly what business is it of yours whether he/she wants to use his/her computer to calculate pi to the 9 billionth digit or simply play annoying musak all day. It's his/her computer and let him/her do with it as they please. If you don't want to answer the question go compile a couple lines of code and munch on a hot pocket or something. Your elitist (notice no quotes this time) attitude is 90% of everything that is wrong with Linux.
Honestly how bout you go compile some code (code which i'm sure is simply a tool for compiling code, since that's all a computer is good for right) and let the rest of us enjoy the richness of color, sound, video, community, and (yes I'll dare say it) fun which in this posters not so humble opinion is exactly what the computers were made for, enriching the lives of humans and not compiling code.
Comment from:
Hans Bezemer [Visitor]
· http://hansoft.come.to
I always tell people switching to Linux to make a dual boot configuration for one simple reason: Linux won't replace all your functionality the first day.
I switched in February 2000. The first day I had about 80% of the functionality I needed. I had some CLI Unix knowledge, but that does help just a little. Knowing C helps a LOT. Installing SuSE 6.2 was a lot easier than I thought. Installing software the Linux way was not too difficult. I just wondered why it was so stable, even after installing multiple packages.
After the first day, every piece of H/W was working ZIP drive, printer, screen, mouse, Internet, modem, sound. The tape drive took a little longer (compiling a kernel module) and I had to replace my scanner for a SCSI/USB type. My parport scanner gave up before there was a viable solution for it.
Gaming was something I have only recently been able to transfer to Linux.
I hated Linux WordPerfect, so I converted all documents to Microsoft Word, so I could access them from StarOffice. Later I turned to LyX.
Xv was really no replacement for Paint Shop Pro. I took quite a while before I understood GIMP and I'm now looking to Krita, being a KDE guy anyway. I used NovoGraph until I changed to Dia, which I really like.
I use QEMU with Win98 for legacy multimedia CD-ROMs, an occasional game and making Win32 packages for my 4tH compiler. Before, I used VMWare. Wine enables me to run about 10-25% of legacy Windows applications.
DOSbox runs my legacy games, DOSemu is used to make MS-DOS packages for my 4tH compiler.
MPlayer helped a lot where multimedia was involved. I never burned a disk on a non-Linux platform. OOo helps me to keep connected to the MS-Office world, I rarely use it myself.
Nowadays, I don't run dual boot anymore, but it was a great help in the transition period. Buying a good book on Linux helps a LOT. I bought one and was able to do fancy stuff like setting up font servers. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS EFFORTLESS TRANSITION!! Switching to Linux needs dedication and determination. And most certainly the willingness to learn - a lot!
There are things that could be better. Support for "older" Linux versions is about two - three years after release. After about one - two years you will already find your system is not supported anymore. I recently compiled KOffice 1.6.1 for SuSE 9.2 which not only took several hours, but also stopped four or five times due to errors. I fixed them, but a non-programmer would have given up a long time ago. I consider upgrading a running system too great a risk, reinstallation too much work.
Not a Linux problem in itself, but you always have to keep a lot in mind when buying new hardware - not everything works out of the box, which is simply annoying.
Linux will always convince in the long run due to stability, responsiveness and cheap, safe and trouble free computing. Nuff said.
I switched in February 2000. The first day I had about 80% of the functionality I needed. I had some CLI Unix knowledge, but that does help just a little. Knowing C helps a LOT. Installing SuSE 6.2 was a lot easier than I thought. Installing software the Linux way was not too difficult. I just wondered why it was so stable, even after installing multiple packages.
After the first day, every piece of H/W was working ZIP drive, printer, screen, mouse, Internet, modem, sound. The tape drive took a little longer (compiling a kernel module) and I had to replace my scanner for a SCSI/USB type. My parport scanner gave up before there was a viable solution for it.
Gaming was something I have only recently been able to transfer to Linux.
I hated Linux WordPerfect, so I converted all documents to Microsoft Word, so I could access them from StarOffice. Later I turned to LyX.
Xv was really no replacement for Paint Shop Pro. I took quite a while before I understood GIMP and I'm now looking to Krita, being a KDE guy anyway. I used NovoGraph until I changed to Dia, which I really like.
I use QEMU with Win98 for legacy multimedia CD-ROMs, an occasional game and making Win32 packages for my 4tH compiler. Before, I used VMWare. Wine enables me to run about 10-25% of legacy Windows applications.
DOSbox runs my legacy games, DOSemu is used to make MS-DOS packages for my 4tH compiler.
MPlayer helped a lot where multimedia was involved. I never burned a disk on a non-Linux platform. OOo helps me to keep connected to the MS-Office world, I rarely use it myself.
Nowadays, I don't run dual boot anymore, but it was a great help in the transition period. Buying a good book on Linux helps a LOT. I bought one and was able to do fancy stuff like setting up font servers. HOWEVER, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS EFFORTLESS TRANSITION!! Switching to Linux needs dedication and determination. And most certainly the willingness to learn - a lot!
There are things that could be better. Support for "older" Linux versions is about two - three years after release. After about one - two years you will already find your system is not supported anymore. I recently compiled KOffice 1.6.1 for SuSE 9.2 which not only took several hours, but also stopped four or five times due to errors. I fixed them, but a non-programmer would have given up a long time ago. I consider upgrading a running system too great a risk, reinstallation too much work.
Not a Linux problem in itself, but you always have to keep a lot in mind when buying new hardware - not everything works out of the box, which is simply annoying.
Linux will always convince in the long run due to stability, responsiveness and cheap, safe and trouble free computing. Nuff said.
Comment from:
machiner [Visitor]
· http://www.debiantutorials.org
Exactly. You and I share the same spirit and attitude, as well as our treatment to issues.
I liked your article and if I could write a coherent sentence I would have written the same thing.
Rock On.
I liked your article and if I could write a coherent sentence I would have written the same thing.
Rock On.
Comment from:
Josh [Visitor]
Pete, you continuously claim that you intend no sarcasm yet your post is full of it. It isn't difficult to understand the concept that technology should meet users needs/wants. Technology should adapt to people, rather than people having to adapt to technology. Despite how much you mock the title of "elitist," you are the epitome of it. Condescending elitists such as yourself do more to harm Linux than to help it.
Comment from:
Jeff Cobb [Visitor]
· http://www.jbcobb.net
Amen. You speak my mind. WRT the books, RTFM et al vs the Google searches from hell, I would posit that
1. Free software costs just like any other software; the 'coin' of the realm however is not money but rather education. Yes, newbie, you too can have more power than your Win32 friends but it will cost you the use of your brain and your ingenuity and perserverence. If you have and apply all of these, you will succeed unless you are indeed too stupid to use a computer. I make no apologies about this.
2.The reality however is that when linux was getting going, it only attracted the kind of folks who inuitively understood the above point. Now that it is gaining more mass adoption, it is attracting folks whome #1 above does not describe, shall we say. They are the ones complaining about RTFM responses because they know damned well the books are out there but they are too lazy to do the proper research. The reason of course that RTFM is hated so much is that there is nothing a basically lazy person hates to do more than being forced to do something they have already expended (to their mind) too much energy already getting *out* of. And the reason RTFM exists is the same thing; as more research-lazy people started asking the same question over and over and over again when the answer was in hundreds of freely available sources, the gurus had enough and started telling them to read the fine manual because that's how they had to figure it out themselves.
And before someone calls this the lazy answer to the lazy question, I would counter that it is actually the most profound answer this person is going to get, because to an engineer, its all about truth and proof. You cannot bullshit a program into working, IOW. So when someone asks me how to do something , and I tell them to RTFM because I did, I am simply giving them the answer that I am the most sure will be accurate and correct and has been proven to *me* to work.
If being a True (tm) answer isn't enough, it is also the Right (tm) answer and I don't look to anything other than shared culture as proof. Where do you think the expression "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat forever." came from? After teaching the 100th person to fish however, the author of that remark probably started responding 'Read the fine scroll.'
The problem is that this will never be the answer someone described in #2 above will e*ever* want to hear or accept because it goes against want they want (just gimme the answer!) and thus linux will be forever out of reach for them.
Kind of a key difference in users is some work with computers for the love of computing and the possibilites it provides (what can I *do* with it?). The other camp uses computers in a purely utilitarian fashion (what can it do for *me*?).
The former will always excel and succeed with open source and find proprietary software too constraining. This won't change.
The latter will always survive just enough with Windows et al and fail just enough with anything else to view the rest of the comuting world as the fringe.
And anytime these two worlds intersect, the ideological barrier will be too great, like a linguist who can speak 20 different languages being unable to help give a deaf person directions with sign language. OK the analogy is odd but it works in my head. This is why when we try to help ex-Win32 folks, no matter how hard we try to give them the Right Answer or the most effective answer, it will never be the answer they need and they will walk away unfulfilled, through no fault on anyones part. All parties are simply acting true to their nature.
1. Free software costs just like any other software; the 'coin' of the realm however is not money but rather education. Yes, newbie, you too can have more power than your Win32 friends but it will cost you the use of your brain and your ingenuity and perserverence. If you have and apply all of these, you will succeed unless you are indeed too stupid to use a computer. I make no apologies about this.
2.The reality however is that when linux was getting going, it only attracted the kind of folks who inuitively understood the above point. Now that it is gaining more mass adoption, it is attracting folks whome #1 above does not describe, shall we say. They are the ones complaining about RTFM responses because they know damned well the books are out there but they are too lazy to do the proper research. The reason of course that RTFM is hated so much is that there is nothing a basically lazy person hates to do more than being forced to do something they have already expended (to their mind) too much energy already getting *out* of. And the reason RTFM exists is the same thing; as more research-lazy people started asking the same question over and over and over again when the answer was in hundreds of freely available sources, the gurus had enough and started telling them to read the fine manual because that's how they had to figure it out themselves.
And before someone calls this the lazy answer to the lazy question, I would counter that it is actually the most profound answer this person is going to get, because to an engineer, its all about truth and proof. You cannot bullshit a program into working, IOW. So when someone asks me how to do something , and I tell them to RTFM because I did, I am simply giving them the answer that I am the most sure will be accurate and correct and has been proven to *me* to work.
If being a True (tm) answer isn't enough, it is also the Right (tm) answer and I don't look to anything other than shared culture as proof. Where do you think the expression "Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he will eat forever." came from? After teaching the 100th person to fish however, the author of that remark probably started responding 'Read the fine scroll.'
The problem is that this will never be the answer someone described in #2 above will e*ever* want to hear or accept because it goes against want they want (just gimme the answer!) and thus linux will be forever out of reach for them.
Kind of a key difference in users is some work with computers for the love of computing and the possibilites it provides (what can I *do* with it?). The other camp uses computers in a purely utilitarian fashion (what can it do for *me*?).
The former will always excel and succeed with open source and find proprietary software too constraining. This won't change.
The latter will always survive just enough with Windows et al and fail just enough with anything else to view the rest of the comuting world as the fringe.
And anytime these two worlds intersect, the ideological barrier will be too great, like a linguist who can speak 20 different languages being unable to help give a deaf person directions with sign language. OK the analogy is odd but it works in my head. This is why when we try to help ex-Win32 folks, no matter how hard we try to give them the Right Answer or the most effective answer, it will never be the answer they need and they will walk away unfulfilled, through no fault on anyones part. All parties are simply acting true to their nature.
Comment from:
Jeff Rollin [Visitor]
· http://latedeveloper.org.uk
@bluenevus.
Linux has a small market share because almost every computer shipped has Windows on it. If people had to go looking, I maintain a lot more people would go looking for Linux.
No, Windows is not the Great Satan. But it is far and away less suitable than Linux to be the OS on 95% of desktops.
Next time, try making a point without using the words "get real", "pathetic", or personalizing the argument. Until then you're just a troll and your arguments will be associated with trolls like you, not sensible, sane people.
Linux has a small market share because almost every computer shipped has Windows on it. If people had to go looking, I maintain a lot more people would go looking for Linux.
No, Windows is not the Great Satan. But it is far and away less suitable than Linux to be the OS on 95% of desktops.
Next time, try making a point without using the words "get real", "pathetic", or personalizing the argument. Until then you're just a troll and your arguments will be associated with trolls like you, not sensible, sane people.
Comment from:
bluenevus [Visitor]
Jeff,
Obviously you're taking this personal as you have resorted to personal insults. Just google the market share and you will find the market share of Linux doesn't agree with your viewpoint. If you love linux so much and it is the answer for 95% of the market why does it have such a small portion of the market share? The people have spoken and they are not all trolls. Your attitude along with Pete is why Linux suffers so much. So if it so great and you truly love it, just relax and STOP taking it so personal or get a life. The product will speak for itself.
Obviously you're taking this personal as you have resorted to personal insults. Just google the market share and you will find the market share of Linux doesn't agree with your viewpoint. If you love linux so much and it is the answer for 95% of the market why does it have such a small portion of the market share? The people have spoken and they are not all trolls. Your attitude along with Pete is why Linux suffers so much. So if it so great and you truly love it, just relax and STOP taking it so personal or get a life. The product will speak for itself.
Comment from:
rcjhawk [Visitor]
· http://hawknotes.blogspot.com/
Wow, Pete, you sure can stir them up.
In my heart of hearts, I agree with you. In fact, I believe that the only people who should use a computer are those who pass a test about computers. Of course, in my heart of hearts, I believe that the only people who should be allowed to vote are those who can pass a simple test (whether or not they agree with me, of course). Ain't neither of those things gonna happen.
That said, let me go off on a tangent: why do we pay taxes for schools? To give our kids an education? No! We're geeks. We'll get our kids educated if we have to do it ourselves. No, we pay school taxes to make sure that other folk's kids get an education. This hopefully gets them gainfully employed so that they aren't reduced to mugging us on the street.
So why do we want people to switch from Windows to Linux (or OS X, or Unix or Solaris or even BeOS)? Because we want everyone to follow us, lemming-like? No, we want people to switch from Windows because it improves our time on-line, by reducing the number of computers that can be easily infected with viruses, trojans, and spyware, all of which conspire to eat up bandwidth and fill our inboxes with spam. It does this in two ways: 1) because all of the above OS are inherently more secure than any Windows before Vista (about which I have no opinion, since it isn't really out yet); and 2) because learning how to run Linux, OS X, ... tends to make one more knowledgeable about how a computer works.
Given that, instead of Read the Frakin' Manual, maybe we should say have you looked at ... ? You don't have to look all that far, in most cases, for the ... Most popular distributions have forums, and just about everything a newbie can ask is asked in the forums.
Of course, just like with God and prayer, sometimes the answer is "Sorry, bub, can't do it." In that case, we can recommend that the newbie write the powers that be requesting a Linux (OS X, Solaris, yada yada) version of whatever, and tell him we hope he has good luck with his virus infected Windows computer and please, oh pretty please with sugar on it, wipe my email out of your address book.
And, maybe, just maybe, exposure to Linux will make newbies realize that the computer isn't just a black box that does lets them look at p0rn, it's a system that is most useful and best enjoyed when you take a little bit of time to understand how it works.
***************************************
Random musings, not to be taken seriously, and which may or may not contradict whatever I said above:
Pete: Why would you want to watch movies on a computer?
You have a student going to college. You can buy and pack a TV, a DVD player, a CD player, and a Blackberry. Or you can buy a portable computer with a DVD drive. Pick one.
Then there's YouTube, which is a mindless way to fill evenings while waiting for Pratchett to turn out a new Discworld novel and for Bujold to get off the fantasy kick and tell us what happens to Miles's kids.
Josh: I agree, technology should adapt to people. I'd love for my car to be able to drive me to work while I sleep. That hasn't happened yet, so I'm expected to figure out how to drive the thing and keep it from crashing into the idiot motorcyclists who insist on white-lining at 80 mph. (Not to disparage white-liners, per se. There are lots of idiots out on the road, many of them in SUVs.) I just want an educated computer user. Unfortunately, most Windows users don't fall in that category, which is why my inbox has several hundred messages concerning can't miss penny stocks. Users of "alternative" OSes, even Macs, seem to be a little more knowledgeable about how computers work.
OS Junkie: I suspect all of your cars run pretty much the same way. There isn't one model that continually crashes and destroys the cars around it. Well, since the demise of the Pinto, anyway.
DarkWraith007: "Just try using just about any Linux distro without knowing the console, or what 'root' is, or so forth. Good luck getting software to run, or installing software, or compiling from source." I submit that any Windows user who can actually compile programs is more than capable enough to learn how to use "root" in Ubuntu, probably in about 30 seconds (plus an additional 5 seconds to set the root password). I'm not worried about Windows users who can compile C#. My inbox is filled with Spam from Windows computers whose owners don't care to know about anti-virus and anti-spyware programs.
And, actually, I've rarely had trouble compiling software under Linux/Unix provided the author has given me a good ./configure script. One that tells me which libraries are missing, if any, or is written to work around the missing ones.
In my heart of hearts, I agree with you. In fact, I believe that the only people who should use a computer are those who pass a test about computers. Of course, in my heart of hearts, I believe that the only people who should be allowed to vote are those who can pass a simple test (whether or not they agree with me, of course). Ain't neither of those things gonna happen.
That said, let me go off on a tangent: why do we pay taxes for schools? To give our kids an education? No! We're geeks. We'll get our kids educated if we have to do it ourselves. No, we pay school taxes to make sure that other folk's kids get an education. This hopefully gets them gainfully employed so that they aren't reduced to mugging us on the street.
So why do we want people to switch from Windows to Linux (or OS X, or Unix or Solaris or even BeOS)? Because we want everyone to follow us, lemming-like? No, we want people to switch from Windows because it improves our time on-line, by reducing the number of computers that can be easily infected with viruses, trojans, and spyware, all of which conspire to eat up bandwidth and fill our inboxes with spam. It does this in two ways: 1) because all of the above OS are inherently more secure than any Windows before Vista (about which I have no opinion, since it isn't really out yet); and 2) because learning how to run Linux, OS X, ... tends to make one more knowledgeable about how a computer works.
Given that, instead of Read the Frakin' Manual, maybe we should say have you looked at ... ? You don't have to look all that far, in most cases, for the ... Most popular distributions have forums, and just about everything a newbie can ask is asked in the forums.
Of course, just like with God and prayer, sometimes the answer is "Sorry, bub, can't do it." In that case, we can recommend that the newbie write the powers that be requesting a Linux (OS X, Solaris, yada yada) version of whatever, and tell him we hope he has good luck with his virus infected Windows computer and please, oh pretty please with sugar on it, wipe my email out of your address book.
And, maybe, just maybe, exposure to Linux will make newbies realize that the computer isn't just a black box that does lets them look at p0rn, it's a system that is most useful and best enjoyed when you take a little bit of time to understand how it works.
***************************************
Random musings, not to be taken seriously, and which may or may not contradict whatever I said above:
Pete: Why would you want to watch movies on a computer?
You have a student going to college. You can buy and pack a TV, a DVD player, a CD player, and a Blackberry. Or you can buy a portable computer with a DVD drive. Pick one.
Then there's YouTube, which is a mindless way to fill evenings while waiting for Pratchett to turn out a new Discworld novel and for Bujold to get off the fantasy kick and tell us what happens to Miles's kids.
Josh: I agree, technology should adapt to people. I'd love for my car to be able to drive me to work while I sleep. That hasn't happened yet, so I'm expected to figure out how to drive the thing and keep it from crashing into the idiot motorcyclists who insist on white-lining at 80 mph. (Not to disparage white-liners, per se. There are lots of idiots out on the road, many of them in SUVs.) I just want an educated computer user. Unfortunately, most Windows users don't fall in that category, which is why my inbox has several hundred messages concerning can't miss penny stocks. Users of "alternative" OSes, even Macs, seem to be a little more knowledgeable about how computers work.
OS Junkie: I suspect all of your cars run pretty much the same way. There isn't one model that continually crashes and destroys the cars around it. Well, since the demise of the Pinto, anyway.
DarkWraith007: "Just try using just about any Linux distro without knowing the console, or what 'root' is, or so forth. Good luck getting software to run, or installing software, or compiling from source." I submit that any Windows user who can actually compile programs is more than capable enough to learn how to use "root" in Ubuntu, probably in about 30 seconds (plus an additional 5 seconds to set the root password). I'm not worried about Windows users who can compile C#. My inbox is filled with Spam from Windows computers whose owners don't care to know about anti-virus and anti-spyware programs.
And, actually, I've rarely had trouble compiling software under Linux/Unix provided the author has given me a good ./configure script. One that tells me which libraries are missing, if any, or is written to work around the missing ones.
Comment from:
Karl O. Pinc [Visitor]
Another good alternative is finding a local linux users group. There's a list at linux.org. Or if you're really in luck you'll google for freegeek and find one in your city.
Comment from:
warner [Visitor]
Some folk interpret complaints about difficulty using Linux as complaints about Linux itself, I think they rather are just complaints about how hard it is to find the relevant info, as someone posted above "just tell me where the dam manual is".
Your suggestion to "buy a book" is limited at best. When I started with linux I bought about ten, good luck finding the answer to the WMV question in your book.
Sure some people don't want to put in _any_ effort but thats not what we are really talking about here. We are talking about _how much work_ someone needs to put in to find the answer.
And on this topic I have a few thoughts.
Firstly you need books as well as Google, and Wikipedia is enormously helpful also.
The second thought derives from the first, you need all those because documentation in GNU/Linux is either obtuse, assuming of pre-existing knowledge, fragmented, all of the aforementioned, or just not there.
What makes Windows "easy" for new users is it is discoverable. Whether that is clicking through the GUI or "whats this" feature or all programs having a windows help file accessed in the same format. Even having a GUI for everything adds to it being discoverable.
The CLI may be the most advanced tool for getting things done but it is an almost total show stopper for a novice user. There really is no reason for a modern _desktop_ OS not to have a GUI _as well as_ the CLI to get basic day to day stuff done.
Really, if there were GUI's for everything that needed to be done, decent unified organized (GUI based) help, context help & wizards it would go a long way to helping new users. Something as simple as guides for "if you are coming from Windows you do the same task in Linux like this" would be a godsend.
All of those except the last are just basic things that should be in any desktop OS.
And for all the people that say Linux (GNU) doesn't want/isn't about taking over the world, being the most popular/widely used OS, bulls**t. Of course it is, do you think the FSF believes there is someone undeserving of the four freedoms? Most programers may start scratching their itch but it grows into pride at excellence and desire for usefullness in a wider context.
So yea "buy a book" is a part of the solution but it is also only addressing a part of the problem.
As always, if someone is tired of the same newbie questions they should leave the answering to others.
Your suggestion to "buy a book" is limited at best. When I started with linux I bought about ten, good luck finding the answer to the WMV question in your book.
Sure some people don't want to put in _any_ effort but thats not what we are really talking about here. We are talking about _how much work_ someone needs to put in to find the answer.
And on this topic I have a few thoughts.
Firstly you need books as well as Google, and Wikipedia is enormously helpful also.
The second thought derives from the first, you need all those because documentation in GNU/Linux is either obtuse, assuming of pre-existing knowledge, fragmented, all of the aforementioned, or just not there.
What makes Windows "easy" for new users is it is discoverable. Whether that is clicking through the GUI or "whats this" feature or all programs having a windows help file accessed in the same format. Even having a GUI for everything adds to it being discoverable.
The CLI may be the most advanced tool for getting things done but it is an almost total show stopper for a novice user. There really is no reason for a modern _desktop_ OS not to have a GUI _as well as_ the CLI to get basic day to day stuff done.
Really, if there were GUI's for everything that needed to be done, decent unified organized (GUI based) help, context help & wizards it would go a long way to helping new users. Something as simple as guides for "if you are coming from Windows you do the same task in Linux like this" would be a godsend.
All of those except the last are just basic things that should be in any desktop OS.
And for all the people that say Linux (GNU) doesn't want/isn't about taking over the world, being the most popular/widely used OS, bulls**t. Of course it is, do you think the FSF believes there is someone undeserving of the four freedoms? Most programers may start scratching their itch but it grows into pride at excellence and desire for usefullness in a wider context.
So yea "buy a book" is a part of the solution but it is also only addressing a part of the problem.
As always, if someone is tired of the same newbie questions they should leave the answering to others.
Comment from:
Penguin Pete [Member]
· http://www.penguinpetes.com/
@rcjhawk
"Wow, Pete, you sure can stir them up."
Heh, actually, it's a powerful issue that gets people stirred up. Technology has moved into our lives, and whether we like it or not the human race is going to have to arrive at some kind of agreement with it.
Humans being even more complicated than computers, I bid that it's easier to explain the computers to the people than the other way around.
"Wow, Pete, you sure can stir them up."
Heh, actually, it's a powerful issue that gets people stirred up. Technology has moved into our lives, and whether we like it or not the human race is going to have to arrive at some kind of agreement with it.
Humans being even more complicated than computers, I bid that it's easier to explain the computers to the people than the other way around.
Comment from:
Jeff Rollin [Visitor]
· http://latedeveloper.org.uk
@bluenevus
Actually, no, out of the two of us it is /you/ who keeps resorting to insults. Or is "Get a life" a new reality show? Like it or not, Linux users do not need to "get a life".
You want to know why Linux and MacOS market share is so small?
(1) Because 99.9% of computer manufacturers absolutely insist on installing some flavour of Windows. Some even try to fob people who ask for no preinstalled OS (in other words, who are willing to go to the hassle of installing Linux themselves, if the manufacturer will just leave Windows out of it) with BS claims of "supplying a computer without an OS (by implication, a Microsoft OS) is illegal".
2. Because (and this isn't entirely Microsoft's fault) 95% of the marketing you see for consumer OS'es comes from Microsoft, who, among other things, have managed to convince the majority of people that (a) Windows does things the only right way (b) crashing and viruses and week-long uptimes or less are normal.
Actually, no, out of the two of us it is /you/ who keeps resorting to insults. Or is "Get a life" a new reality show? Like it or not, Linux users do not need to "get a life".
You want to know why Linux and MacOS market share is so small?
(1) Because 99.9% of computer manufacturers absolutely insist on installing some flavour of Windows. Some even try to fob people who ask for no preinstalled OS (in other words, who are willing to go to the hassle of installing Linux themselves, if the manufacturer will just leave Windows out of it) with BS claims of "supplying a computer without an OS (by implication, a Microsoft OS) is illegal".
2. Because (and this isn't entirely Microsoft's fault) 95% of the marketing you see for consumer OS'es comes from Microsoft, who, among other things, have managed to convince the majority of people that (a) Windows does things the only right way (b) crashing and viruses and week-long uptimes or less are normal.
Comment from:
Penguin Pete [Member]
· http://www.penguinpetes.com/
@bluenevus
You know, I'm tolerant about flames at me. So far, I've preferred to keep maximum freedom for all, here, libertarianism bordering on anarchy, because the site's never drawn enough traffic to matter. But I wonder how long I can have guests flaming each other and still keep that policy? My sole criterion is doing the most right for the most people.
Anyway, try Googling "Microsoft" and then Google "Linux" and look at the hit totals. Forget what's installed on computers sold, by sheer public interest, Linux and Microsoft are neck and neck. In countries outside of the USA, such as India, Linux is even *REQUESTED* on a quarter of computers sold.
Just saying, market share arguments are becoming weaker and weaker.
You know, I'm tolerant about flames at me. So far, I've preferred to keep maximum freedom for all, here, libertarianism bordering on anarchy, because the site's never drawn enough traffic to matter. But I wonder how long I can have guests flaming each other and still keep that policy? My sole criterion is doing the most right for the most people.
Anyway, try Googling "Microsoft" and then Google "Linux" and look at the hit totals. Forget what's installed on computers sold, by sheer public interest, Linux and Microsoft are neck and neck. In countries outside of the USA, such as India, Linux is even *REQUESTED* on a quarter of computers sold.
Just saying, market share arguments are becoming weaker and weaker.
Comment from:
Kevin M [Visitor]
Jeff C. and others,
I have shelf full of Linux and Unix books, mostly reference (they get little use), and some intro-ish. I've read most of most of them. Some parts of some, I've read many times. Those'd be the reference ones, because whenever I do something that requires me to know any more than the most basic cli commands, it's something I haven't done for six months or five years, so it's like starting from scratch. The reference books tell you how to use each command (sometimes even which commands to string together) but often assume that you know
which commands and utilities you actually need, and are only coming to check syntax or the like.
The intro/learning books give a good overview of basic Linux and some howto chapters for some common tasks... but usually by the time those tasks are documented in such a book, they've also been cleaned up or automated in newer distro releases, so half the chapters in the $65 Linux book are outdated before the ink is dry (certainly before you... well, I, not you since you live and breathe this stuff and know it like your phone number... buy the book).
You, I'd bet, have a job (or hobby) that causes you to use most of the arcane and obscure (to the rest of us) commands and utilities every day and twice on Sunday.
Where was I? Oh yeah. I also google (and generally get more answers that way), and therefore read tens of thousands of pages ... or parts of pages ... of Linux stuff.
The problem, and the point, is that for somebody who doesn't do this shit for a living, there's no good way to know which is "TFM" to "R".
On the one hand, you could fire up a Google search for the current problem/task, and arbitrarily exclude any page older than ... um... two years?
Well, no. Many Linux gurus will point out that many/most Linux cli commands are functional and syntactical equivalents of UNIX commands, meaning that they've been around for years (if not decades) essentially unchanged. So a page from 1996 is perfectly fine... and don't be so damn quick to dismiss venerable, proven, stable info about venerable, proven, stable utils and commands, you friggin' noob.
O-ka-a-a-ay... The thing is, the tasks that most non-programmers want to perform are a bit more complex than stringing one or three cli commands (never mind the hundred options, switches, and arguments that must be invoked in a certain order), casually strung together with a pipe and a redirect.
So, we look for HowTos and for conversations in mailing lists and newsgroups. And there are plenty. And none is complete. And you try to get the full story from three or four... and they conflict. Or they're for different distros. Or they're from different eras. But they're what the non-guru has to work from, because whatever the task, it's not described in the reference books. It's not even described in the "Learn Linux in 21 Days" -- those ones tell you about generic use of command line stuff and a bit about cups (but not for your distro) and some outdated stuff about network config. But there you are trying to figure out why only some of your USB devices are even visible... Or you're trying to figure out why your brand-new everything-including-the-kitchen-sink install of opensuse won't run the amusing video on that web site -- what do you mean I have to uninstall xine and all related packages, find (on one of the few sites that hasn't been sued into submission) libdvdcss and several "bootleg" codecs, install them, install a different version of xine (or whatever) than the one that came on my released-last-week distro, all while being aware that I'm making other stuff no longer work... hmph! That wasn't in the books either. Oh, and when I finally waded through all umpty-dozen, subtly-varying sets of instructions and got video working (extra couple of days to get sound working _with_ video ... then extra couple more days to get sound working with everything not-video...), it turns out that cups has somehow been disabled or rerouted to the hot water tap.
Or, I have a task that I really want to do and it turns out that it's easier to uninstall opensuse/fedora/mandriva and install ubuntu, because it's got the right mix of packages to satisfy the dependencies in the other packages I need to install... yeah. right. All of the knowledge to do that sort of thing - starting with the knowledge to recognize what needs doing is right there to read, for anybody who's not too lazy... not too lazy to dig it out of the tens of thousands of similar-but-not-quite-right pages and threads and HowTos and Infos and wikis and... and... guess wrong and you'll screw up your system, but in ways that you'll need another six months of sifting to even realize, never mind understand. So it becomes easier to re-install the distro to get a "known" starting point.
Oh! Was I ranting? Shucks.
Kevin (SuSE and RH user since 1998-ish,
windows user since there was windows,
dos user before that, occasional Mac user, historical mainframe user...)
I have shelf full of Linux and Unix books, mostly reference (they get little use), and some intro-ish. I've read most of most of them. Some parts of some, I've read many times. Those'd be the reference ones, because whenever I do something that requires me to know any more than the most basic cli commands, it's something I haven't done for six months or five years, so it's like starting from scratch. The reference books tell you how to use each command (sometimes even which commands to string together) but often assume that you know
which commands and utilities you actually need, and are only coming to check syntax or the like.
The intro/learning books give a good overview of basic Linux and some howto chapters for some common tasks... but usually by the time those tasks are documented in such a book, they've also been cleaned up or automated in newer distro releases, so half the chapters in the $65 Linux book are outdated before the ink is dry (certainly before you... well, I, not you since you live and breathe this stuff and know it like your phone number... buy the book).
You, I'd bet, have a job (or hobby) that causes you to use most of the arcane and obscure (to the rest of us) commands and utilities every day and twice on Sunday.
Where was I? Oh yeah. I also google (and generally get more answers that way), and therefore read tens of thousands of pages ... or parts of pages ... of Linux stuff.
The problem, and the point, is that for somebody who doesn't do this shit for a living, there's no good way to know which is "TFM" to "R".
On the one hand, you could fire up a Google search for the current problem/task, and arbitrarily exclude any page older than ... um... two years?
Well, no. Many Linux gurus will point out that many/most Linux cli commands are functional and syntactical equivalents of UNIX commands, meaning that they've been around for years (if not decades) essentially unchanged. So a page from 1996 is perfectly fine... and don't be so damn quick to dismiss venerable, proven, stable info about venerable, proven, stable utils and commands, you friggin' noob.
O-ka-a-a-ay... The thing is, the tasks that most non-programmers want to perform are a bit more complex than stringing one or three cli commands (never mind the hundred options, switches, and arguments that must be invoked in a certain order), casually strung together with a pipe and a redirect.
So, we look for HowTos and for conversations in mailing lists and newsgroups. And there are plenty. And none is complete. And you try to get the full story from three or four... and they conflict. Or they're for different distros. Or they're from different eras. But they're what the non-guru has to work from, because whatever the task, it's not described in the reference books. It's not even described in the "Learn Linux in 21 Days" -- those ones tell you about generic use of command line stuff and a bit about cups (but not for your distro) and some outdated stuff about network config. But there you are trying to figure out why only some of your USB devices are even visible... Or you're trying to figure out why your brand-new everything-including-the-kitchen-sink install of opensuse won't run the amusing video on that web site -- what do you mean I have to uninstall xine and all related packages, find (on one of the few sites that hasn't been sued into submission) libdvdcss and several "bootleg" codecs, install them, install a different version of xine (or whatever) than the one that came on my released-last-week distro, all while being aware that I'm making other stuff no longer work... hmph! That wasn't in the books either. Oh, and when I finally waded through all umpty-dozen, subtly-varying sets of instructions and got video working (extra couple of days to get sound working _with_ video ... then extra couple more days to get sound working with everything not-video...), it turns out that cups has somehow been disabled or rerouted to the hot water tap.
Or, I have a task that I really want to do and it turns out that it's easier to uninstall opensuse/fedora/mandriva and install ubuntu, because it's got the right mix of packages to satisfy the dependencies in the other packages I need to install... yeah. right. All of the knowledge to do that sort of thing - starting with the knowledge to recognize what needs doing is right there to read, for anybody who's not too lazy... not too lazy to dig it out of the tens of thousands of similar-but-not-quite-right pages and threads and HowTos and Infos and wikis and... and... guess wrong and you'll screw up your system, but in ways that you'll need another six months of sifting to even realize, never mind understand. So it becomes easier to re-install the distro to get a "known" starting point.
Oh! Was I ranting? Shucks.
Kevin (SuSE and RH user since 1998-ish,
windows user since there was windows,
dos user before that, occasional Mac user, historical mainframe user...)
Comment from:
Jeff Cobb [Visitor]
· http://www.jbcobb.net
Kevin et al;
I cannot disagree with much that you say. I would like to leave you with this thought though:
Years ago I took a part-time job teaching C++ in the local college. The money sucked but it was a fascinating laboratory for observing the learning (specifically the technical learning) process and one thing I have learned is that (and I am sorry if this sounds simplistic; I can think of no other way of describing it) while there are many things out there to learn,not all of them are worthy *of* learning. Of what remains though, there is a method or a way to learn unique to that skill.
Its like the old Douglas Adams joke about the answer to life the universe, etc was 42. From one perspective, the answer was absolutely correct. And at the same time, absolutely useless to the listener.
And so it is with most UNIX answers. I too had shelves full of books..but I had the opposite problem; if I had an issue, I'll be damned if I will ask anyone for help and was determined to figure it out on my own. The thing was, most of those books, while technically accurate, told me the answer in a way that I did not understand. Years later, when I finally did learn skill X that had been plaguing me earlier, I looked at those 'old useless' books again an more often than not, found the actual solution I had just 'figured out' in every one of them. I simply had not asked the question right, and I do not mean things you can find in an index. Its a matter of concepts which leads to understanding the answers.
So the presence of books is no guarantee of knowledge,I agree Kevin. However, if someone comes to me with a 'teach me how to do X' then I am always happy to help them. These folks are usually the ones who have already tried hard to help themselves and I will betcha they have more books on their shelves than those who show up asking for help with a 'just give me the damned answer!' attitude.
Of course, sometimes RTFM is the cynical wastebasket reply given to someone who question is usually some derivative of the logic that if Windows does things this way and Linux does things *that* way then logically Linux is broken and they show up looking for help trying to make it more windows-like. These people usually receive answers with quality on par with the question and the sincerity of the user.
I cannot disagree with much that you say. I would like to leave you with this thought though:
Years ago I took a part-time job teaching C++ in the local college. The money sucked but it was a fascinating laboratory for observing the learning (specifically the technical learning) process and one thing I have learned is that (and I am sorry if this sounds simplistic; I can think of no other way of describing it) while there are many things out there to learn,not all of them are worthy *of* learning. Of what remains though, there is a method or a way to learn unique to that skill.
Its like the old Douglas Adams joke about the answer to life the universe, etc was 42. From one perspective, the answer was absolutely correct. And at the same time, absolutely useless to the listener.
And so it is with most UNIX answers. I too had shelves full of books..but I had the opposite problem; if I had an issue, I'll be damned if I will ask anyone for help and was determined to figure it out on my own. The thing was, most of those books, while technically accurate, told me the answer in a way that I did not understand. Years later, when I finally did learn skill X that had been plaguing me earlier, I looked at those 'old useless' books again an more often than not, found the actual solution I had just 'figured out' in every one of them. I simply had not asked the question right, and I do not mean things you can find in an index. Its a matter of concepts which leads to understanding the answers.
So the presence of books is no guarantee of knowledge,I agree Kevin. However, if someone comes to me with a 'teach me how to do X' then I am always happy to help them. These folks are usually the ones who have already tried hard to help themselves and I will betcha they have more books on their shelves than those who show up asking for help with a 'just give me the damned answer!' attitude.
Of course, sometimes RTFM is the cynical wastebasket reply given to someone who question is usually some derivative of the logic that if Windows does things this way and Linux does things *that* way then logically Linux is broken and they show up looking for help trying to make it more windows-like. These people usually receive answers with quality on par with the question and the sincerity of the user.
Comment from:
nightshade [Visitor]
I would just like to say as a newbie that for the most part I agree with this opinion people are just lazy and don't want to take the time to learn
I have a couple of linux books at my home and they have made a HUGE difference in my understanding I'm no guru yet I've only been using linux for about a month but I'm working on it
however where I dissagree with the article is in the fact that there are somethings that will never be in a book and for a newbie having a community that is willing to help in understanding what to do and what not is the most important part of what I've grown to love about linux
I'm still dual booting to XP only because of hardware that I can't get to work under linux YET but I'm not giving up but to those who would say I'm running back to MS get bent there are times and situations that you don't have any other option to get done what you need
there will be a fix for my hardware issue on linux but ontill then I have to run windows
basically for the winers who say "it's not like Windows" your right it's not but that is what makes linux great
to those who think that any newbie who asks for help should just RTFM if that's you opinion fine but don't bash someone untill you know why they need help
linux will replace windows someday but untill then it's everyones's job to help the converts even I've been able to help a few people and I'm only as I said before a month into linux
yes linux can be hard but when you finally get everything working the way you want it's that much more rewarding
anyways that's my rant
________________________________________
Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est
I have a couple of linux books at my home and they have made a HUGE difference in my understanding I'm no guru yet I've only been using linux for about a month but I'm working on it
however where I dissagree with the article is in the fact that there are somethings that will never be in a book and for a newbie having a community that is willing to help in understanding what to do and what not is the most important part of what I've grown to love about linux
I'm still dual booting to XP only because of hardware that I can't get to work under linux YET but I'm not giving up but to those who would say I'm running back to MS get bent there are times and situations that you don't have any other option to get done what you need
there will be a fix for my hardware issue on linux but ontill then I have to run windows
basically for the winers who say "it's not like Windows" your right it's not but that is what makes linux great
to those who think that any newbie who asks for help should just RTFM if that's you opinion fine but don't bash someone untill you know why they need help
linux will replace windows someday but untill then it's everyones's job to help the converts even I've been able to help a few people and I'm only as I said before a month into linux
yes linux can be hard but when you finally get everything working the way you want it's that much more rewarding
anyways that's my rant
________________________________________
Nam et ipsa scientia potestas est
Comment from:
Anon [Visitor]
A couple of side-comments...
1) Just getting into Linux, and the thought to go out and buy a book to learn it didn't occur to me until I read it in this article (d'oh!)
2) I'm a usability advocate by nature. I live by Einstein's quote: "make things as simple as possible and no simpler". But I temper that with the knowledge that not everything should do...everything. Different OS's exist for a reason. Some are user friendly (Windows, despite complaints). Some are server work-horses (Unix). Etc, etc. I'm with you. If this guy wants to view a WMV, then go view it on a friend's Windows computer. With all the lawsuits of MS suing over folks hacking / pirating their proprietary software, it didn't dawn on this kid that WMV, being a windows proprietary format, would not work in Linux. That's just ignorant. If he wants to complain about Linux being unusable...
3) Linux is very usable...if you have a distro that's geared towards that sort of thing. Linux can also be a complete pain, if you have a distro geared towards that. That's the great thing about Linux, it has so many branches on its trees that you can pick-n-choose, which boggles the minds of folks migrating over from Windows. It may be a little difficult to find out which are the good, introductory, noob-usable versions of Linux, but if someone is serious about making the switch, what's a couple hours on Google and Wiki comparing the options? Nothing, when compared to the big picture. You wouldn't buy a car without doing a little research? Well, same goes with the OS. But a lot of Windows users are used to the hand-holding and "just one option" approach, so researching their new OS options doesn't come intuitively. But, with a little digging, there's nothing confusing about sites saying "Ubuntu, Knoppix, etc are noob-friendly, so start there". If some body doesn't even put forth a little effort to get a Linux version that "noobs" it for them so they can handle tasks like this, then, yeah, why are they using Linux? And what right do they have to bash Linux? None. Even if they are using a noob-friendly version...honestly...expecting to get a WMV to work in Linux. Why don't you just go to Burger King, and complain because they can't serve you McDonald's fries. SHEESH!
1) Just getting into Linux, and the thought to go out and buy a book to learn it didn't occur to me until I read it in this article (d'oh!)
2) I'm a usability advocate by nature. I live by Einstein's quote: "make things as simple as possible and no simpler". But I temper that with the knowledge that not everything should do...everything. Different OS's exist for a reason. Some are user friendly (Windows, despite complaints). Some are server work-horses (Unix). Etc, etc. I'm with you. If this guy wants to view a WMV, then go view it on a friend's Windows computer. With all the lawsuits of MS suing over folks hacking / pirating their proprietary software, it didn't dawn on this kid that WMV, being a windows proprietary format, would not work in Linux. That's just ignorant. If he wants to complain about Linux being unusable...
3) Linux is very usable...if you have a distro that's geared towards that sort of thing. Linux can also be a complete pain, if you have a distro geared towards that. That's the great thing about Linux, it has so many branches on its trees that you can pick-n-choose, which boggles the minds of folks migrating over from Windows. It may be a little difficult to find out which are the good, introductory, noob-usable versions of Linux, but if someone is serious about making the switch, what's a couple hours on Google and Wiki comparing the options? Nothing, when compared to the big picture. You wouldn't buy a car without doing a little research? Well, same goes with the OS. But a lot of Windows users are used to the hand-holding and "just one option" approach, so researching their new OS options doesn't come intuitively. But, with a little digging, there's nothing confusing about sites saying "Ubuntu, Knoppix, etc are noob-friendly, so start there". If some body doesn't even put forth a little effort to get a Linux version that "noobs" it for them so they can handle tasks like this, then, yeah, why are they using Linux? And what right do they have to bash Linux? None. Even if they are using a noob-friendly version...honestly...expecting to get a WMV to work in Linux. Why don't you just go to Burger King, and complain because they can't serve you McDonald's fries. SHEESH!
Comment from:
AAM [Visitor]
good article!
too many excuses made for lazy people who think that change should be easier than it is.
I agree that your newbie is playing Linux against a very hard standard - WMA out of the box! Someone might do it.
My adventure with Linux has occurred because I was prepared to do the Google searches, read documentation, try, fail, re-install, try fail, re-install .... x some integer ... then re-install SUCCEED. Record what I did then move on to the next step.
This has been the enjoyable part. I now find that I am getting bored and need a new challenge - coding???
too many excuses made for lazy people who think that change should be easier than it is.
I agree that your newbie is playing Linux against a very hard standard - WMA out of the box! Someone might do it.
My adventure with Linux has occurred because I was prepared to do the Google searches, read documentation, try, fail, re-install, try fail, re-install .... x some integer ... then re-install SUCCEED. Record what I did then move on to the next step.
This has been the enjoyable part. I now find that I am getting bored and need a new challenge - coding???
IMO it's much more easyer to google for informations, and if you're not totally dumb, you will not have any problems any beginner can have.
There are several good Linux beginners how-to's in the world wide web.
Me, for example, tried out, ro read any linux book, but soon i was frustrated, because they are either written for the extreme-newbe who doesn't know how to use folders, like you said in the posts, or to complicated for the beginner, who doesn't know whats bash and whats partition.
I can only talk about the experiences i've made with german books, i don't know how the situation in the us is.